Brooklyn Bridge - Montgomery Coastal Resilience Project Phase IA Archaeological Documentary Study New York city Economic Development Corporation One Liberty Plaza New York, NY 10006 CEQR Number: 19OOM011M December 13, 2019 125 Broad Street New York, NY 10004 This page intentionally left blank. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The New York City Economic Development Corporation (EDC) is proposing the Brooklyn Bridge- Montgomery Coastal Resilience (BMCR) Project for Lower Manhattan. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has delegated lead federal agency authority to the New York City Mayor’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The lead city agency is the Office of the Mayor of the City of New York (OOM), and the applicant is the EDC. The BMCR Project is a part of the larger, Lower Manhattan Coastal Resiliency (LMCR) Project that spans approximately 3.5 miles along the Lower Manhattan coast from Montgomery Street on the East River to the northern end of Battery Park City on the Hudson River. The LMCR project is an integrated coastal protection initiative aimed at reducing flood risk due to coastal storms and sea level rise. This Phase IA documentary study is concerned with the 0.82-mile-long BMCR segment of the larger LMCR project, which runs along the East River from Montgomery Street on its northern end to the northern side of the Brooklyn Bridge at its southern end. For this undertaking, project north corresponds to the north/south-oriented FDR Drive. The BMCR Project aims to protect the Two Bridges neighborhood from flood events and sea level rise through a flood control system. This goal would be realized by using a combination of permanent flood walls, roller gates, and flip-up gates, including tie-ins to the existing floodplain boundary. The BMCR Project would require extensive subsurface excavation to implement. Most of the alignment runs beneath the elevated FDR Drive, and connects inland at each end of the project where it meets the 100- year floodplain. The BMCR Project alignment is supported throughout its length by micropiles, which may extend to 60 feet below grade. The alignment also includes a seepage control system along the length of the alignment. The design of the foundation support of the seepage control system could utilize a 4-foot- wide slurry wall 30-foot deep or employ micropiles extending up to 60 feet below grade. Therefore, the entire alignment has the potential to impact archaeological resources. Given the extent of subsurface disturbance through excavation that would be required for the implementation of the various elements of the BMCR Project, the archaeological APE is proposed to be the footprint of the proposed project area. The APE was subdivided into three sections in order to organize the large amount of data presented, and to continue with the organization seen in the archaeological documentary study prepared by Richard G. Schaefer, Ph.D. of Historical Perspectives, Inc. (HPI), titled East River Waterfront Esplanade and Piers – Inboard Resources North of Brooklyn Bridge Phase IA Archaeological Assessment. Construction activities vary across the project area with respect to anticipated horizontal and vertical extents of disturbance, particularly in association with existing utility removal and installation of new utilities in new alignments. As noted in the following chapters of this report and noted in the project plans, the mapped locations of utility lines are tentative, and subject to verification by the utility owners prior to BMCR Project construction activities. It is also noted that the installation of certain utility lines have already impacted subsurface conditions across the project area, although likely not to depths that would completely eliminate Executive Summary ES-1 Executive Summary Brooklyn Bridge-Montgomery Draft Phase IA Archaeological Coastal Resilience Project Documentary Study archaeological potential. However, verification of utility corridor locations may serve to refine the areas of potential sensitivity. The BMCR Project Area includes modern landfill, historic landfill retaining structures, piers, wharves, and historic and modern landfill deposits. Recurring historic development, the installation of the modern bulkhead, 20th century urban renewal efforts, multiple utility installations, transportation infrastructure improvements such as the construction of the South Street Viaduct of the FDR Drive, and the construction of the East River Esplanade elements have impacted the project area. However, the research completed for this Phase IA documentary study suggests that there is potential for intact submerged Precontact resources, riverbottom remains, historic landfill retaining structures, piers, wharves and slips, and historic landfill deposits in discrete portions of the APE. The following table is a summary of the categories of potential archaeological resources by APE section. SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 Archaeological Roosevelt Street – Catharine Slip – Rutgers Slip – Resource Category Catharine Slip South Rutgers Slip South Montgomery Street Area within 42.5 feet of modern bulkhead, Submerged No Potential below 40 feet of mean No Potential Precontact height of water (mhw) has low potential Area between 19th Area between 19th century bulkhead and century bulkhead and Riverbottom 42.5 feet landward of 42.5 feet landward of No Potential Remains modern bulkhead, 23 to modern bulkhead, 40 to 39.5 feet below mhw has 55.7 feet below mhw has moderate potential moderate potential Area under the Area below South Street landward 70 feet of Area below South Street landward of 19th century South Street from from landward sidewalk Landfill Retaining bulkhead has moderate Clinton Street to line to 42.5 feet inland Structures, Wharves potential to 56 feet Montgomery Street has of modern bulkhead, to And Piers below mhw; no potential moderate potential; 40.1 feet below mhw has from 38 to 64 feet inland no potential from 17 moderate potential of modern bulkhead to 57 feet inland of modern bulkhead Area under South Street Area under South Street landward from the 19th Area under the landward landward from the 19th century bulkhead; and 70 feet of South Street, century bulkhead has older bulkhead 110-112 Landfill Deposits landward of the 19th moderate potential; no feet across Catharine century bulkhead has potential from 19th Slip and 71-74 feet moderate potential century bulkhead across Market Slip have outboard moderate potential Executive Summary ES-2 Executive Summary Brooklyn Bridge-Montgomery Draft Phase IA Archaeological Coastal Resilience Project Documentary Study Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Federal Regulations ............................................................................................ 1-1 1.1.2 New York State Regulations ............................................................................... 1-2 1.1.3 New York City Regulations ................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 General Project Description ............................................................................................. 1-3 1.3 Proposed Project Actions ................................................................................................. 1-3 1.3.1 Flip-Up Sections ................................................................................................. 1-4 1.3.2 Fixed Flood Walls ............................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.3 Isolation Gate Control House ............................................................................. 1-4 1.3.4 Drainage Infrastructure Improvements ............................................................... 1-5 1.3.5 Watermain Installation and Removal.................................................................. 1-5 1.3.6 Other Actions ...................................................................................................... 1-5 1.4 Archaeology Area of Potential Effect (APE) ................................................................... 1-6 1.5 Objectives and General Methodology ............................................................................. 1-6 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Geology ............................................................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Topography ...................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................... 2-2 3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Visual Inspection ............................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Synthesis of Previous Work ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.2.1 Previously Identified Sites .................................................................................. 3-1 3.2.2 Previously Conducted Archaeological