draft scope of work for the preparation of an ... · fumihiko maki and fx fowle team, particularly...

8/29/2013

DRAFT

Scope of Work for the

Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement

United Nations Consolidation Project

{00961262; 6}

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................... 4 C. ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ....................................... 8 D. PROPOSED SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ..................... 9

Chapter 1 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................10 Chapter 2 - LAND USE, ZONING, AND PUBLIC POLICY .....................................................10 Chapter 3 - SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS .....................................................................11 Chapter 4 - COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES .......................................................14 Chapter 5 - OPEN SPACE ....................................................................................................14 Chapter 6 - SHADOWS .........................................................................................................17 Chapter 7 - HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES .......................................................18 Chapter 8 - URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES ...................................................20 Chapter 9 - NATURAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................21 Chapter 10 - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ..............................................................................21 Chapter 11 - WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE .....................................................22 Chapter 12 - SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES ................................................24 Chapter 13 - ENERGY……………………………………………………………………………… 24 Chapter 14 - TRANSPORTATION .........................................................................................24 Chapter 15 - AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................28 Chapter 16 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ...................................................................30 Chapter 17 - NOISE ..............................................................................................................31 Chapter 18 - PUBLIC HEALTH ..............................................................................................33 Chapter 19 - NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER .....................................................................33 Chapter 20 - CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ............................................................................34 Chapter 21 - ALTERNATIVES ...............................................................................................35 Chapter 22 - EIS SUMMARY CHAPTERS .............................................................................36

List of Tables

Table 1 2018 No Action Development Projects within the Study Area .......................................11 List of Abbreviations and Defined Terms ...................................................................................47

List of Figures

Figure 1 Project Site ..............................................................................................................38 Figure 2 View of Consolidation Building from East River .......................................................39 Figure 3 Consolidation Building Perspective..........................................................................40 Figure 4 Maximum Building Envelope ...................................................................................41 Figure 5 Site Plan ..................................................................................................................42 Figure 6 Ground Floor Plan ...................................................................................................43 Figure 7 Second Floor Plan ...................................................................................................44 Figure 8 Existing Land Use ...................................................................................................45 Figure 9 Existing Zoning ........................................................................................................46

{00961262; 6}DRAFT—For Review i

A. INTRODUCTION

UNDC is a public benefit corporation of the State of New York, which develops and

operates office space and other facilities for the UN and related entities within the UN District in

the vicinity of the UN Headquarters in the City. UNDC has previously developed the three UN

Plaza Buildings in the UN District. The UN Plaza Buildings are located on East 44th Street,

directly across First Avenue from UN Headquarters. Approximately 95% of the office space in

the UN Plaza Buildings is leased by UNDC to the UN and used by UN employees for office and

related purposes.

The powers of UNDC and the boundaries of the UN District are defined in New York

State legislation (Chapter 345 of the 1968 Laws of New York, as amended to date) under which

UNDC was created and operates. In addition, development of office space and other facilities

by UNDC is subject to compliance with relevant provisions of the Zoning Resolution, principally

the UN District Zoning. The UN District Zoning creates and sets forth for purposes of the

Zoning Resolution the boundaries of the UN District based on the definition in Chapter 345 as

amended. Additionally, the UN District Zoning requires that development by UNDC within the

UN District comply with the regulations of a C5-3 zoning district under the Zoning Resolution,

except as otherwise provided in the UN District Zoning, and comply with a Development Plan

and a design concept approved by the CPC and the City Council. The boundaries of the UN

District without reference to the 2011 Legislation referred to below are East 43rd Street on the

south, East 45th Street on the north, First Avenue (UN Plaza) on the east and the mid-block

between First and Second Avenues on the west.

The 2011 Legislation, signed by the Governor in 2011, amended UNDC’s powers to,

among other matters, include within the boundaries of the UN District the project site described

below, which is currently a portion of a City park known as Robert Moses Playground, and to

permit UNDC to develop the Consolidation Project described below, principally on the project

site (the Proposed Action). Under the 2011 Legislation, the City is authorized to discontinue use

{00961262; 6}DRAFT—For Review 1

of the project site as park land and transfer the site to UNDC for development of the

Consolidation Project.

The powers and authority provided in the 2011 Legislation were not permitted to be

exercised, however, unless a memorandum of understanding, as referred to in that Legislation,

was completed and signed by the Mayor of the City and the leaders of the New York State

Legislature after consultation with identified City elected representatives (in addition to the

Mayor). In October 2011, the required memorandum of understanding, which is referred to

below and in the EIS as the MOU, was signed as provided in the 2011 Legislation. The MOU

sets forth conditions precedent, which are referred to below in this Scope of Work and also in

the EIS, with which UNDC and the City are required to comply in order to exercise the powers

and authority provided in the 2011 Legislation. These conditions precedent include approvals

by the CPC and the City Council, which are discussed below under “UNDC, City Land Use and

Other Discretionary Approvals.” Additionally, the required conditions precedent under the MOU

and the 2011 Legislation include the following:

1. De-mapping as a street and mapping as park land Asser Levy Place in Manhattan between

23rd and 25th Streets, and making the existing streetbed available for public use for active

recreation;

2. Completion of required design work for the submission of applications, if deemed necessary,

for required approvals and permits from NYSDEC, USACE and USCG for the rehabilitation

of the Con Edison pier in Manhattan at 38th to 41st Streets and the submission of those

applications, if any;

3. Completion of required design work for the submission of applications for required approvals

and permits from NYSDEC, the USACE and USCG for the planned East River esplanade

from 53rd to 60th Streets and the submission of those applications; and

4. Completion of required design work for the submission of applications for required approvals

and permits from NYSDEC, the USACE and USCG for the planned East River esplanade


from 41st to 51st Streets.

The 2011 Legislation and the MOU also require that the following additional conditions

precedent be satisfied before a transfer by the City to UNDC of the project site:

(a) Execution of the lease from UNDC to the UN for UN occupancy of the CB; and

(b) Payment by UNDC of $73 million for deposit to a separate, segregated fund for use

for open space and related purposes in accordance with the MOU.

The lease from UNDC to the UN is under negotiation and is subject to review and approval by

the UN General Assembly.

A required environmental review concerning the Proposed Action is being conducted in

accordance with SEQRA, for which UNDC will serve as the lead agency. Documentation to

assess environmental impacts will be prepared also to meet the technical requirements in the

CEQR Technical Manual1.

Based on a preliminary review of the Environmental Assessment Form that has been

prepared for the Proposed Action, UNDC has determined that the Proposed Action may result in

significant environmental impacts. An EIS will therefore be prepared to support the decision-

making process. Scoping is the initial phase of the EIS preparation and provides an early

opportunity for the public and other agencies to be involved in the EIS process. The scoping

process is intended to determine the issues and alternatives to be evaluated in the EIS. This

draft EIS Scope of Work has been prepared to facilitate the scoping process. It provides a

description of the Proposed Action, presents the proposed framework for the EIS analysis,

identifies the alternatives to be evaluated, and discusses the methodologies to be followed in

the preparation of the DEIS.

All Figures referred to herein are included at the end of this Scope of Work. Also

included at the end of this Scope of Work is a List of Abbreviations and Defined Terms as used

1 Most current version of the CEQR Technical Manual will be used; June 2012 or later, as available.


herein and in the EIS. This list includes, for example, the “CB,” meaning the “Consolidation

Building.”

B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

PROJECT SITE

The project site is located at 724 First Avenue in the City, Borough of Manhattan, across

East 42nd Street from UN Headquarters to the north, and consists of a portion of Manhattan

Block 1353, Lot 1 (see Figure 1). Currently, the project site is the western portion of Robert

Moses Playground. The project site is bounded on the west by First Avenue; on the south by

East 41st Street; on the north by East 42nd Street; and on the east by land on which the QMT

ventilation structure is located, and the portion of the Robert Moses Playground—currently

occupied by a dog run—immediately north of the QMT ventilation structure (see Figure 1). The

surface area of the project site is approximately 28,850 sf.

PROJECT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

The Consolidation Project includes construction on the project site of the CB with

approximately 930,000 gsf but not more than 900,000 sf of zoning floor area, as defined in the

Zoning Resolution, and a tunnel (see Figure 1) under East 42nd Street to provide a direct and

secure connection between UN Headquarters and the CB for movement of UN personnel other

than by automobile. The CB and tunnel would be constructed in a single phase. UNDC

expects that design for the Consolidation Project now in progress will be completed in time for

construction to start in 2015 and be completed in 2018.

The maximum building footprint of the CB would be approximately 25,675 sf. The

maximum height of the CB would be 546 feet, which does not exceed the height of the existing

UN Secretariat building at UN Headquarters immediately north of the project site. The upper

stories of the CB would accommodate office space for use by approximately 2,700 UN

employees. The lower floors would accommodate cafeteria and related support space, and

space for ancillary activities including building support and mechanical space. In addition to the


approximately 2,700 UN employees at the CB, an estimated additional 100 workers are

expected to be employed to provide building and related support services. The main UN

employee entrance to the CB would be on First Avenue at the southeast corner of East 42nd

Street. A visitor entrance would be located mid-block on First Avenue, between East 41st and

42nd Streets. Loading dock service bays would be located on East 41st Street. For purposes

of analysis in the EIS, it is projected that 2,800 workers will be employed at the CB. Figures 2 to

7 illustrate certain distinctive design elements of the CB.

The Consolidation Project is being designed by Fumihiko Maki, laureate of the

prestigious Pritzker Architecture Prize, working with the distinguished New York architectural

firm FXFowle. The CB will enhance the Midtown Manhattan skyline and complement the

architectural heritage of the UN Headquarters complex designed by an international team of

architects led by New Yorker Wallace Harrison, with the participation of Charles E. Le Corbusier

and Oscar Niemeyer.

As discussed below under “UNDC, City Land Use and Other Discretionary Approvals,”

construction of the CB requires prior approval by the CPC and the City Council of UNDC’s

“Further Development Plan” and a “design concept” for the CB. The “design concept” will call

out key elements of the design by the Fumihiko Maki and FX Fowle team that complement the

UN Headquarters complex and enhance the Midtown Manhattan skyline. The UN District

Zoning requires that the Chair of the CPC be satisfied that final plans for the CB conform to the

“design concept” as approved by the CPC and the City Council. This requirement provides

assurance that the CB as constructed will incorporate the key elements of the design by the

Fumihiko Maki and FX Fowle team, particularly those that complement the UN Headquarters

complex and the Midtown Manhattan skyline.

PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED

Currently, approximately 10,800 UN employees work in the City. When renovations at

UN Headquarters now in progress are completed in the near future and before 2018, UN


Headquarters will accommodate approximately 3,600 employees. The UN Plaza Buildings

currently accommodate approximately 2,950 UN employees and are expected to continue to do

so at least until 2023. Those employees not accommodated at UN Headquarters or the UN

Plaza Buildings currently use space leased by the UN in several office buildings at scattered

locations in Manhattan, and without the Consolidation Project, such use could be expected to

continue.

The Consolidation Project provides an opportunity for UN employees not accommodated

at UN Headquarters to relocate from multiple office buildings at scattered locations and be

accommodated at a unique site adjacent to UN Headquarters with a secure direct connection

via the tunnel under East 42nd Street included as part of the Project. This consolidation

provides operational, efficiency and security benefits for the UN and UN employees.

The UN is currently studying possible options for meeting its need for space in the City

for offices and related purposes. These options include leasing the CB from UNDC. UN

officials are currently negotiating with UNDC concerning terms for UN occupancy of the CB.

The UN has made no final commitment in this regard. UNDC understands that the options

under study by the UN are subject to review, consideration and action by the UN General

Assembly at a future date.

In the absence of the CB, UNDC is unable to provide the opportunity for the UN that is

described above. The project site is unique due to its location in relation to UN Headquarters.

Additionally, under the applicable enabling legislation, UNDC lacks corporate power to provide

additional office space to meet the UN’s needs at any other location. In the absence of the CB,

it can be expected that for the foreseeable future, many UN employees will continue to be

accommodated in multiple office buildings at scattered locations in Manhattan. For those

employees and others with whom they interact, physical attendance at meetings and access to

and use of shared facilities, such as archives with records not available electronically, are

impeded with losses in employee time and efficiency. The cost of security measures for


employees and UN operations, and the loss of time and efficiency among employees from those

measures, are increased as well.

UNDC, CITY LAND USE AND OTHER DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS

A. UNDC Board of Directors.

The Consolidation Project requires the following approvals by the Board of Directors of

UNDC, taking into account the review of environmental impacts of the Project:

1. Approval of the design for the Consolidation Project;

2. Approval of the terms of the lease from UNDC to the UN for the CB;

3. Approval of UNDC’s sale of bonds or other debt instruments to finance Project construction;

and

4. Approval to proceed with construction, including construction documents and budgets.

B. City Land Use and Related Approvals.

The following actions by the CPC and the City Council are required for the Consolidation

Project:

1. Approval of UNDC’s “Further Development Plan” for the CB and the project site as required

under the 2011 Legislation and the UN District Zoning, including land use authorization for

disposition by the City to UNDC of the project site and for the demapping, closing and

disposition to UNDC by the City of volumes of space below East 42nd Street for the tunnel

connection between the CB and UN Headquarters for the movement of UN personnel other

than by automobile;

2. Zoning map amendment to modify the boundaries of the UN District as currently mapped to

include the project site in the UN District in accordance with the 2011 Legislation, with the

accompanying zoning of a C5-3 district under the Zoning Resolution, subject to exceptions

under the UN District Zoning;


3. Zoning text amendment to the UN District Zoning to conform to the 2011 Legislation and to

include a provision, with related text modifications, for a “design concept” for the CB in

conjunction with the approval of UNDC’s “Further Development Plan;” and

4. Approval of de-mapping the project site as park land.

C. Other City Actions

The following actions by the Mayor of the City and by the Chair of the CPC, without need

for other approvals, are required for the Consolidation Project:

1. Mayoral action to implement the closing and demapping as a street of the below grade

portion of 42nd Street for the CB tunnel connection with UN Headquarters;

2. Mayoral action to implement the transfer to UNDC of the project site and the closed and de-

mapped below grade portion of 42nd Street; and

3. Certification by the Chair of the CPC that the final plans for the CB conform to the “design

concept” as previously approved for the CB in conjunction with the approval of UNDC’s

“Further Development Plan.”

C. ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

The potential impacts of the Proposed Action on the environment will be evaluated in

accordance with the methodologies and impact assessment criteria called for in the CEQR

Technical Manual. As discussed above, approximately 2,700 UN employees and an estimated

additional 100 workers providing building and related support services would occupy the CB.

Additionally, a tunnel under East 42nd Street would connect the CB to the UN Headquarters for

movement of UN personnel other than by automobile. This constitutes the development

scenario for the purpose of the assessment of future conditions with the Proposed Action. The

future “Analysis Year” for the purposes of the EIS is 2018, which is the year of estimated

construction completion and occupancy of the CB.

The EIS will provide a description of “Existing Conditions” in accordance with procedures

referred to later in this scope of work. An assessment of future conditions in 2018 without the


Proposed Action (Future Conditions without the Proposed Action, or No Action scenario) would

then be developed integrating information about trends and known developments anticipated to

occur by 2018. The assessment of future conditions without the Proposed Action assumes that

in 2018, the project site continues to be park land owned by the City without construction of the

CB. A scenario depicting conditions in 2018 with the Proposed Action (Future Conditions with

the Proposed Action, or Build scenario) would then be developed by integrating information

about the Proposed Action with the No Action scenario.

Impacts will be determined by a comparison of the projected future conditions in 2018

with and without the Proposed Action. The difference in conditions between these two

scenarios is attributable to the Proposed Action and will be assessed using criteria defined in

the CEQR Technical Manual to determine significant impacts. Wherever the potential for

significant impacts is identified, practicable mitigation measures would be identified.

D. PROPOSED SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

The EIS will contain: A. A description of the Proposed Action and its environmental setting;

B. A description of the purpose and need for the Proposed Action;

C. The disclosure and analysis of the environmental impacts of the Proposed Action, including its short- and long-term impacts and typical associated environmental effects;

D. An assessment of the No Action Condition;

E. A discussion and evaluation of any reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action that would address its purpose and need;

F. An identification of any significant adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided if the Proposed Action is implemented;

G. An identification of irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources accompanying the Proposed Action; and

H. A description of mitigation proposed to minimize any significant adverse environmental impacts.

The specific components of the EIS are described below.


CHAPTER 1 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This chapter of the EIS will provide a detailed description of the Proposed Action. The

chapter will contain a brief description of the proposed development program; a description of

the design of the CB, including depictions of the CB; and a discussion of the role of the EIS.

The project description chapter provides the public and decision-makers with basic

programmatic information to allow Future Conditions with the Proposed Action to be compared

with the No Action Condition and alternative development options. The project description will

be consistent with the ULURP application, which will be prepared simultaneously.

This chapter will also explain the basic approach to the technical chapters (see Section

C, “Analysis Framework for Environmental Review,” above).

CHAPTER 2 - LAND USE, ZONING, AND PUBLIC POLICY

The land use, zoning, and public policy analysis will assess the potential impacts of the

expected changes in land uses resulting from the Proposed Action. Based on CEQR Technical

Manual guidelines, the Proposed Action could reasonably be expected to create potential direct

and indirect impacts within 0.25-mile of the project site, which, therefore, will be the study area

for land use, zoning, and public policy analysis. The 0.25-mile study area is generally bounded

by East 47th Street to the north, the East River to the east, East 34th Street to the south, and

Third Avenue to the west (see Figure 8). The land use, zoning and public policy analysis will

include a description of existing relevant land use, zoning, and public policy controlling

development and provide an evaluation of the projected future in 2018 with and without the

Proposed Action. The work effort associated with this analysis includes:

A. Preparation of a brief development history of the project site and 0.25-mile study area;

B. Describing existing conditions at the project site and in the study area, including existing

land uses, the current zoning, the policies stated in the City’s WRP and other relevant public

policies;


C. Describing existing predominant land use patterns in the study area, including recent

development trends;

D. Describing existing zoning including recent zoning actions in the study area (see Figure 9);

E. Describing any pending zoning actions or other public policies that could affect land use

patterns and trends in the study area or are otherwise relevant to the project site and study

area, including any plans for public improvements, any special zoning districts, coastal zone

considerations and any publicly approved or otherwise publicly recognized neighborhood or

community plans;

F. Identifying and listing, as confirmed through discussion with NYCDCP, the development

projects in the study area (No Action projects) expected to be built and completed no later

than 2018, the project’s build year (see Table 1), and describing the impact of the No Build

projects on land use patterns and development trends. The 2018 No Build projects that

have been identified by NYCDCP consist of:

Table 1 2018 No Action Development Projects within the Study Area

Address Program Description Build Year

50 UN Plaza 87-unit, 240,000 sf residential building 2013

616 First Avenue 92,500 sf school 2013

626 First Avenue Two residential towers; 800 units 2016

G. Describing the Proposed Action and providing an assessment of impacts on land use and

land use trends, zoning, and public policy, including consideration of effects related to

surrounding land use, development trends and conditions in the area, and consistency with

zoning, the City’s WRP and other public policy initiatives.

CHAPTER 3 - SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS

Socioeconomic impacts can occur when a proposed action directly or indirectly changes

economic activity in an area. The purpose of the socioeconomic assessment is to disclose


changes that would be created by the Proposed Action and identify whether they rise to a

significant level. In accordance with CEQR Technical Manual guidelines, this chapter will

examine the impact of the Proposed Action on socioeconomic conditions within a study area of

0.25-mile of the project site (which will be coterminous with the land use study area described in

Chapter 2), including changes to the population and housing profiles; increases in economic

activity; displacement of businesses, employment and residences from the project site; and

potential indirect displacement.

The analysis will follow the guidelines of the CEQR Technical Manual in assessing the

impact of the Proposed Action on socioeconomic conditions within the 0.25-mile study area.

According to the CEQR Technical Manual, the five principal issues of concern with respect to

socioeconomic conditions are whether a proposed project would result in significant impacts

due to: (1) direct residential displacement; (2) direct business and institutional displacement; (3)

indirect residential displacement; (4) indirect business and institutional displacement; and (5)

adverse effects on a specific industry.

In conformance with CEQR Technical Manual guidelines, the analysis of these five

areas of concern will begin with a preliminary assessment for the study area. Detailed analyses

will be conducted for those analysis components in which the preliminary assessment cannot

definitively rule out the potential for significant adverse impacts. The work effort required to

address each area of concern is described below.

DIRECT RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT

Since the project site is currently unimproved, no direct residential displacement would

occur as a result of the Proposed Action. Therefore, a preliminary assessment of direct

residential displacement is not warranted according to the CEQR Technical Manual.

DIRECT BUSINESS AND INSTITUTIONAL DISPLACEMENT

Since the project site is currently unimproved, no direct business or institutional

displacement would occur as a result of the Proposed Action. Therefore, a preliminary


assessment of direct business or institutional displacement is not warranted according to the

CEQR Technical Manual.

INDIRECT RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT

The objective of the indirect residential displacement analysis is to determine whether a

proposed action—by introducing a substantial new development that is markedly different from

existing uses, development, and activities within the neighborhood—could lead to increases in

property values, and consequent increases in rents, making it difficult for some residents to

afford their homes. Since the Proposed Action does not involve any new residential

development, a preliminary assessment of indirect residential displacement is not warranted

according to the CEQR Technical Manual.

INDIRECT BUSINESS AND INSTITUTIONAL DISPLACEMENT

The objective of the indirect business and institutional displacement analysis is to

determine whether a proposed action—by introducing a substantial new development that is

markedly different from existing uses, development, and activities within the neighborhood—

would ultimately lead to higher property values and rents in commercial or institutional buildings

in the study area, causing existing businesses or institutions to relocate from the study area or

from the City as a whole, or add to or create a retail concentration that may draw a substantial

amount of sales from existing businesses. Since the Proposed Action would be similar to

existing adjacent development, and would not include a retail component (other than building

lobby services such as a newsstand), a preliminary assessment of indirect business or

institutional displacement is not warranted according to the CEQR Technical Manual.


ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES

Based on CEQR Technical Manual guidelines, the assessment of impacts on specific

industries will consider the following: 1) whether a proposed project would significantly affect

business conditions in any industry or category of businesses within or outside the study area;

and 2) whether a proposed project would substantially reduce employment or impair viability in

a specific industry or category of businesses. Since the Proposed Action would not affect

conditions within any specific industry, a preliminary assessment of adverse impacts on specific

industries is not warranted according to the CEQR Technical Manual.

CHAPTER 4 - COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES

In accordance with the thresholds of the CEQR Technical Manual and because the CB

would not introduce new residents to the study area, the Proposed Action would not require

detailed analyses of potential impacts on schools, libraries, outpatient health care facilities, or

publicly funded day care centers. Additionally, because the Proposed Action would not cause

the displacement of a police or fire facility, no detailed assessment of such services is required.

CHAPTER 5 - OPEN SPACE

Based on the CEQR Technical Manual, an open space analysis should be conducted if

a proposed action would cause the physical loss of public open space, change the use of open

space so that it no longer serves the same user population, limit public access to open space, or

cause increased noise or air pollutant emissions, odors, or shadows that would affect the

usefulness of open space, whether on a permanent or temporary basis. An open space

analysis should also be conducted if a proposed action would indirectly affect existing open

space resources. The thresholds of the CEQR Technical Manual require an assessment of a

proposed action’s indirect impact if the action would increase the population by more than 200

residents or 500 workers.

The 2011 Legislation has authorized the City to discontinue use of the project site as

park land and to transfer the project site to UNDC. The project site will continue to be park land


available for public recreational use until it is transferred by the City to UNDC and is no longer

designated park land. Since the Proposed Action will result in the physical loss of active public

open space, an assessment will be provided in the EIS of the potential direct significant adverse

open space impact of the Proposed Action. In addition, because the Proposed Action would

result in an increase of more than 500 workers, which exceeds the thresholds of the CEQR

Technical Manual for an analysis of potential indirect impacts, an open space analysis will be

completed to determine whether the added workers would affect the quantitative and qualitative

measures of open space adequacy within the .25 mile study area recommended for commercial

projects in the CEQR Technical Manual.

The assessment of the No Action Condition in the Analysis Year will include reference to

certain open space and recreational facilities provided for in the MOU but beyond a 0.25-mile

radius of the project site. Under the MOU, de-mapping the portion of the existing City street

known as Asser Levy Place in Manhattan between 23rd and 25th Streets and turning the de-

mapped former street into an area available to the public for active recreation is a condition

precedent to the transfer by the City to UNDC of the project site, as described above. Another

condition precedent to the transfer of the project site is the completion of design work for any

permit applications to NYSDEC, USACE and USCG for the rehabilitation of the Con Edison pier

between East 38th and 41st Streets and the submission of those applications, if any. The City

is responsible for and will conduct and control the above actions, including the creation of open

space resources that do not now exist. In doing this, the City will satisfy conditions precedent

under the MOU.

In order to satisfy other conditions precedent under the MOU, the City will also

undertake design work for an East River esplanade for public recreational use that will extend

more than 5,000 linear feet along the East River from East 41st to 60th Streets. In addition, in

order to satisfy another such condition precedent, UNDC will provide at least $73 million that the

City will control under the MOU and that will be available to advance the City's work on the


esplanade. UNDC has no control over and has no other participation in that work. UNDC

understands that no portion of the esplanade is expected to be completed prior to the Analysis

Year. Completion of the esplanade by the City at a later date, however, would materially

expand available open space in the open space study area and for more than 13 blocks to the

north.

The following tasks are proposed for the open space analysis:

A. Open Space Mapping. Inventory existing open space and recreational facilities within a

0.25-mile radius of the project site. Tally open space acreage for publicly accessible

passive and active recreational facilities;

B. Direct Impact Analysis. In coordination with the Open Space Mapping, and Shadows, Air

Quality, and Noise Chapters, determine the potential for the Proposed Action to result in

significant adverse direct effects on open spaces within a 0.25-mile radius of the project site;

and

C. Quantitative Assessment (Indirect Impact Analysis):

1) Identify the study area population—e.g., the existing number of residents and workers in the

open space study area will be estimated.

2) With respect to the inventory of open space and recreational facilities described above,

assess the adequacy of existing open space. The existing open space ratios for the study

area will be calculated. The ratios will be expressed as the number of acres of open space

per 1,000 residents and the number of acres of passive open space per 1,000 workers,

respectively.

3) Determine the future No Action Condition. Assess expected changes in open space supply

and demand as of 2018 based on public open space expected to be developed and on

planned development projects, including the No Action development projects, within the study

area. Develop open space ratios for future conditions and compare them with existing ratios

to determine changes in levels of adequacy as of 2018.


4) Determine the future open space ratios with the Proposed Action. Based on the worker

population to be added by the Proposed Action, assess the impact on open space supply and

demand. The assessment of impacts will be based on a comparing open space ratios for

residents and the worker population between the Proposed Action and the No Action

Condition.

CHAPTER 6 - SHADOWS

As described in the CEQR Technical Manual, shadow impacts could occur, in general, if

an action would result in new structures or building additions over 50 feet in height that could

cast shadows on natural features, on publicly accessible open space, or on historic resources

that are dependent on sunlight. Shadows falling on streets and sidewalks or other buildings

generally are not considered significant, nor are shadows occurring within an hour-and-one-half

of sunrise or sunset.

The Proposed Action would include the construction of a multi-story building more than

50 feet in height. Because the project site and CB are in proximity to the Tudor City Historic

District and nearby publicly accessible open space, the effects of building-generated shadows

on publicly accessible open space and historic resources with sunlight-sensitive features will be

assessed, using the methodology recommended in the CEQR Technical Manual. An analysis

of shadows will be prepared focusing on the incremental shadows created by the CB (i.e., the

additional shadows cast in the future with the Proposed Action as compared to the shadows that

would be cast under the No Action Condition) in relation to any publicly accessible open space,

natural features or sunlight-sensitive historic resources within reach of the incremental shadows.

This analysis will include the following tasks:

A. Identify publicly accessible open space, natural features and sunlight-sensitive historic

resources within the path of the incremental shadows created by the CB. In coordination

with a survey of publicly accessible open space, historic resources and natural features,

map and describe any sunlight-sensitive resources. For open space, map active and


passive recreation areas and features of the open space such as benches or play

equipment, as appropriate;

B. Create a CAD model of the project site and adjacent area that will include existing buildings

and future buildings that would exist by 2018. The model will take into account the

topography of the area. Establish the future “build” scenario by adding the CB data to the

No Action Conditions CAD model;

C. Prepare shadow diagrams for time periods on analysis days when shadows from each

scenario could fall onto existing publicly accessible open space, any natural features or any

historic resources that may have significant sunlight dependent features, such as stained

glass windows. The four analysis days as stipulated by the CEQR Technical Manual are:

March 21—the vernal equinox, which is the equivalent of September 21—the autumnal

equinox; May 6—the midpoint between the equinox and the longest day of the year, which is

the equivalent of August 6—the midpoint between the equinox and the shortest day of the

year; June 21—the longest day of the year; and December 21—the shortest day of the year;

D. Describe the impact of the incremental shadows created by the CB on publicly accessible

open space, any natural features and any historic resources with significant sunlight-

dependent features based on the shadow diagrams for each of the analysis days. Assess

the impact of the incremental shadows compared with shadows expected in the No Action

Condition; and

E. Create a duration table that will show the entering and exiting times when an incremental

shadow would fall on each affected publicly accessible open space or natural feature or

sunlight-sensitive historic resource.

CHAPTER 7 - HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

According to the CEQR Technical Manual, a historic resources assessment is

undertaken if there is the potential to impact either archaeological or architectural resources.

Actions that could impact archaeological resources and that typically require an assessment are


those that involve above-ground construction resulting in ground disturbance or below-ground

construction, such as excavation. Actions that require an architectural resources assessment

include new construction, demolition, or significant alteration to any historic building, structure,

or object; a change in scale, visual prominence, or visual context of any historic building,

structure, or object or landscape feature; construction, including but not limited to, excavation,

vibration, subsidence, dewatering, and the possibility of falling objects; additions to or significant

removal, grading, or replanting of significant historic landscape features; screening or

elimination of publicly accessible views; and the introduction of significant new shadows or

significant lengthening of the duration of existing shadows over a historic landscape or on a

historic structure with sunlight dependent features (see “Shadows” above).

ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

As described in the CEQR Technical Manual, a detailed assessment of archaeological

resources is required for actions that would result in in-ground disturbance. Since the Proposed

Action would result in subsurface disturbance at the project site, an assessment of potential

archaeological resources is warranted. A Phase 1A investigation report that was accepted by

the SHPO in June 2003, with findings confirmed by the SHPO in 2012, indicated the potential

presence of intact subsurface features associated with 19th century occupation of the area, and

recommended that testing of this area should be conducted prior to construction. The DEIS will

discuss the findings of the Phase 1A investigation, and the testing program to be implemented

prior to construction.

ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES

The project site is located across First Avenue from the Tudor City Historic District,

which is listed on the S/NR and is a designated NYCHD and NYCL. Therefore, as set forth in

the CEQR Technical Manual, an architectural resources analysis will be prepared, including

identifying a study area to evaluate any potential impacts on architectural resources, identifying

designated and potential architectural resources in that study area, assessing potential effects


in comparison to the No Action Condition as appropriate, and developing mitigation measures

with the SHPO and the NYCLPC, if warranted. The historic resources analysis will be

undertaken in consultation with the SHPO and the NYCLPC.

Specifically, the following tasks will be undertaken as part of the architectural resources

analyses:

A. Map and briefly describe known architectural resources within a 400-foot study area.

Known architectural resources comprise NYCLs and NYCHDs, whether designated by the

NYCLPC or pending NYCL designation, and properties and districts listed or determined

eligible for listing on the S/NR, including NHLs;

B. Conduct a field survey of the study area to determine whether there are any potential

architectural resources that could be impacted by the Proposed Action. Potential

architectural resources comprise properties that appear eligible for listing on the S/NR

and/or designation as a NYCL or NYCHD. Map and briefly describe any potential

architectural resources;

C. Describe the potential for any changes in the study area and its architectural resources in

the No Action Condition; and

D. Assess the potential impacts on any known or potential architectural resources.

CHAPTER 8 - URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES

This analysis will consider the impact of the Proposed Action on the urban design and

visual resources of the surrounding area in comparison to conditions in the future without the

Proposed Action. The analysis will include a primary study area of 400 feet from the project

site, as well as a secondary study area of 0.25-mile from the project site. The assessment will

be based on CEQR Technical Manual methodologies and will include the following tasks:

A. Based on field visits, describe the urban design of the project site and study area, using

photographs and text as appropriate. A description of existing natural features, block forms,

streetscape elements, street patterns and street hierarchy, as well as building bulk, use,


type, and arrangement of the study area will be included as per the CEQR Technical

Manual;

B. As per the CEQR Technical Manual, based on field visits, describe visual resources and

view corridors in the area;

C. Based on planned development projects, describe the changes in the urban design and

visual character of the study area that are expected in the future without the Proposed

Action;

D. Assess the changes in urban design characteristics and visual resources in the study area

that are expected to result from the Proposed Action in comparison to the No Action

Condition, and evaluate the significance of the changes. The architectural design of the CB,

including design of the exterior, will be addressed in this assessment; and

E. Consider the impact on pedestrians from potential wind conditions related to the Proposed

Action.

CHAPTER 9 - NATURAL RESOURCES

This chapter will assess the potential impacts to natural resources that may result from

the Proposed Action. The project site is largely impervious surface, with perimeter trees spaced

at regular intervals as the only vegetation resources. The site provides almost no habitat for

wildlife. The scope of work for this task will be as follows:

A. Describe potentially affected natural resources (plants, birds, other wildlife, threatened or

endangered species, and floodplains) on the project site. Included in this effort will be an

inventory of perimeter trees including species, condition, and size; and

B. Evaluate building design features relative to their potential to increase bird strike incidents.

CHAPTER 10 - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

This chapter will assess the potential for the Proposed Action to result in increased

exposure to hazardous materials. Although the project site currently serves as park land,

hazardous materials and petroleum products were determined to be a concern based on the


site’s prior use as a MGP. A detailed site investigation was conducted by Con Edison Company

of New York, Inc. (former owner of the site) in 2006 under the terms of its Voluntary Clean-up

Agreement with NYSDEC in order to determine whether the past use may have resulted in

identifiable site contamination. This investigation determined that there are no appreciable

areas of contamination on the project site. As a result, NYSDEC and NYSDOH have concluded

that no further investigation or remedial action is required.

The EIS will address the potential presence of hazardous materials on the project site by

summarizing the results of prior hazardous materials investigations, and by reporting the

conclusion of NYSDEC regarding site conditions. The EIS will include any recommendations for

monitoring conditions during construction and health and safety measures that would be

implemented during construction to protect workers.

CHAPTER 11 - WATER AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE

This chapter will assess the additional demands on the utility infrastructure that would

result from the Proposed Action. This infrastructure includes water supply, sanitary sewage,

and storm water runoff. The EIS will include an evaluation of the extent to which utility

infrastructure relocation will be required to implement the Proposed Action and the potential

impact of the relocation. The analyses will include the following tasks:

WATER SUPPLY

A. Based on information obtained from NYCDEP, the existing water supply network and

capacity of the distribution system that currently serves the project site will be described.

Improvements to the water supply system that are expected to be implemented in the future

without the Proposed Action will also be identified;

B. Using appropriate estimated water usage rates, water demand from the Proposed Action will

be estimated;


C. The potential for significant adverse impacts on the water supply system’s abilities to

maintain adequate water supply and operating pressure as a result of the Proposed Action’s

incremental water demand will be assessed;

WASTEWATER

A. Based on information obtained from NYCDEP, the existing sewer system serving the project

site will be described. The existing average and maximum monthly flows to the Newtown

Creek WPCP for the latest 12-month period will be provided;

B. Using the water demand determined in the task above and NYCDEP projections, the

sanitary sewage generation for the No Action Condition and in the future with the Proposed

Action will be estimated;

C. The potential for significant adverse impacts in terms of system conveyance and WPCP

treatment capacity as a result of the Proposed Action’s incremental sanitary sewage

demands will be assessed. Taken into account will be the sustainable features of the

project design that would reduce the storm water discharge to the combined sewer. This

evaluation would include a screening level assessment that compares the estimated storm

water and sanitary volumes and flows that would be discharged to the combined sewer in

the future with and without the Proposed Action. If the screening indicates the need for

further analyses, modeling would be conducted in consultation with NYCDEP taking into

consideration the results of the screening level assessment;

D. The compliance of the Newtown Creek WPCP with its permit requirements, which are

protective of the East River’s water quality, will be discussed;

STORMWATER

A. The existing storm and combined sewer system serving the project site will be described.

The description will include the major sewer lines and the location of existing combined

sewer outfalls into the East River;


B. Using NYCDEP design criteria, storm water runoff rates from the CB will be calculated and

compared to baseline conditions; and

C. The potential reductions in storm water runoff from proposed sustainable measures will be

reflected qualitatively in the analysis.

CHAPTER 12 – SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES

This chapter will assess the CB’s generation of solid waste and demand for sanitation

services and will:

A. Describe existing and future New York City solid waste disposal practices; and

B. Assess the impacts of incremental solid waste generation from the Proposed Action on the

City’s collection needs and disposal capacity.

CHAPTER 13 - ENERGY

This chapter will present an estimate of the energy demand at the CB, including a

discussion of energy conservation features of the Proposed Action, and will discuss the ability of

the energy systems to meet this demand.

CHAPTER 14 - TRANSPORTATION

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

The project site is located near existing retail and office developments in Midtown

Manhattan, and the ability of the transportation system to absorb additional traffic from the

Proposed Action will be an important concern. The roadway network in this section of

Manhattan is congested, with many of the existing intersections already operating at poor levels

of service. UN employees working at the CB will generate additional vehicular, transit, and

pedestrian trips going to and from the project site during typical commuter periods.

The specific traffic analysis for the Proposed Action will be based on guidance in the

CEQR Technical Manual. The following analytical tasks will be undertaken as part of the traffic

analyses:


A. Identify a study area that encompasses the principal travel corridors to/from the project site.

Based on preliminary trip generation and trip assignment estimates, the study area has

been defined to include the area bounded by East 49th Street to the north, FDR Drive to the

east, East 34th Street to the south, and Second Avenue (Third Avenue at East 38th Street)

to the west;

B. Determine the location of the intersections to be analyzed in detail, in consultation with

NYCDOT. The following 12 intersections will be analyzed for the weekday AM, Midday, and

PM peak hour conditions: FDR Drive at East 34th Street and 38th Streets; First Avenue at

East 38th, 39th, 40th, 41st, 42nd, 46th, 47th, and 48th Streets; and Second Avenue at East 42nd

and 46th Streets;

C. Inventory street widths, sidewalk widths, traffic flow directions, curbside parking regulations,

and other factors required for the traffic analysis. The inventories will be limited to study

area intersections. The most recent signal timings from NYCDOT for each study area

intersection will be obtained. Analyses of the future conditions will take into account all

proposed NYCDOT transportation-related improvements in the study area;

D. A 2012 Existing Conditions traffic network will be developed. This data collection effort

would include ATR counts and TMCs to establish daily and hourly patterns and vehicle

classification, as well as intersection counts. TMCs are recorded at 15-minute intervals to

provide data for determining the PHFs required for capacity calculations, and then

summarized for each peak travel period;

E. Analyze the capacity of the street system in the study area to provide a detailed evaluation

of existing conditions using the HCM version 4.1f 2000 methodology. Existing levels of

service, v/c ratios, and average vehicle delays on streets in the traffic study area will be

determined for each peak hour;

F. Compute future traffic volumes in the No Action Condition taking into account a background

traffic growth rate for the study area of 0.50 percent per year due to future development


without the CB and, in coordination with Chapter 2, the volume of traffic expected to be

generated by 2018, including as a result of individual projects anticipated to be in place by

2018 and any specified traffic mitigation measures. NYCDCP has identified projects listed

in Table 1 “No Action Development Projects” within the traffic study area, as well as a later

phase of the East River Science Park which is outside the traffic study area, as having the

potential to influence the future traffic network. A planned relocation of the UN garage

entrance from East 48th Street to East 42nd Street is also expected to be completed by 2018.

The traffic network will be adjusted to incorporate these identified projects and the planned

garage entrance relocation. Traffic volumes will be determined, v/c ratios and levels of

service will be calculated, and substandard intersection conditions will be identified;

G. Determine trip generation and modal split characteristics, including vehicular, pedestrian,

and other non-motorized transportation for the CB using standard references and recent

surveys;

H. Conduct a parking survey of the on- and off-street facilities within .25 mile of the project site

in conformance with the CEQR Technical Manual;

I. Perform a traffic impact assessment at locations where peak hour project generated

vehicular trips are estimated to exceed 50. Project-generated trips will be assigned and

mapped to the network, taking into consideration the parking availability, for each analysis

period, and the impact on v/c ratios and delays will be evaluated using the HCM

methodology. Significant impacts will be identified in accordance with CEQR Technical

Manual guidelines;

J. Collect accident data and perform safety analyses. An investigation of the latest three years

of accident history will be conducted to identify potential safety issues concerning study area

intersections and to evaluate potential safety impacts that future project-generated trips may

have on these locations. The recorded accidents will be categorized and correlated with

observed operational conditions. This information will be used as the basis for


recommending potential safety improvements and will be taken into consideration should

the intersections also require traffic mitigation; and

K. Recommend and analyze mitigation measures, as appropriate, for all significantly impacted

locations in the study area.

TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIANS

As discussed above, the CB would generate additional transit and pedestrian trips to

and from the project site. Although the project site is well-served by public transportation,

certain nearby transit facilities and sidewalks experience congestion during the morning and

evening peak periods.

The following analytical tasks will be undertaken for the CB in compliance with

guidelines contained in the CEQR Technical Manual if CEQR thresholds for a detailed analysis

are exceeded:

A. Perform a quantitative subway analysis at the closest subway station serving the site in the

AM (7 to 10 AM) and PM (3 to 6 PM) peak hours. The analysis will consist of an

assessment of the key station elements, including stairways, control booths, and turnstile

areas. Counts under Existing Conditions will be conducted and assignment of transit trips in

the No Action condition and in the future with the CB will be undertaken in accordance with

the travel demand information developed in the “Traffic” section. Future volumes at these

analysis locations will be increased by a background growth rate of 0.50 percent per year as

per CEQR Technical Manual guidelines. Future No Action Condition and CB generated

subway riders will be added to the transit network and analyzed. CB generated impact

criteria will be assessed in accordance with the CEQR Technical Manual and/or NYCT

design criteria;

B. Perform a quantitative analysis of the potential impact of the CB on local bus services for the

weekday AM and PM peak hours. The peak hour bus trips from the CB will be estimated

and assigned to the individual bus routes serving the site and deficiencies, if any, at the


peak load point will be determined. The bus analysis will conform to the guidelines in the

CEQR Technical Manual and any CB generated impacts will be identified; and

C. Perform at the corners, sidewalks, and/or crosswalks of key pedestrian study locations a

quantitative pedestrian analysis for existing conditions, the No Action Condition, and the

future with the CB condition.

The EIS will also address the effect on bus service from a security-related or other

requirement to relocate the existing bus stops on East 41st and East 42nd Streets. This

assessment would be based on discussions with MTA New York City Bus.

CHAPTER 15 - AIR QUALITY

The Proposed Action would generate emissions from both direct and indirect sources.

High efficiency boilers will be used for heating and hot water systems. The possible effect of

direct emissions from the CB will be examined including an analysis of the effect of pollutants

from the CB on existing or planned sensitive uses within the surrounding area.

Potential indirect air quality impacts of the Proposed Action would stem from increases

in vehicular traffic carrying people to and from the project site and would also be examined. The

number of vehicle trips generated by the Proposed Action may potentially exceed the CEQR

Technical Manual air quality analysis screening thresholds for CO at one or more locations

within the study area. At locations where this occurs, an analysis of mobile emissions air quality

impacts will be conducted. The potential change in CO levels that would result from the

additional vehicle trips generated by the Proposed Action would be assessed at these locations.

In addition to CO, an air quality analysis will be performed to assess the potential impacts on

ambient PM2.5 and PM10 levels if the projected truck traffic generated by the Proposed Action

exceeds NYCDEP guidance criteria.

Emissions from the QMT ventilation building will be examined to determine whether they

may potentially affect air quality at CB air intake locations.


MOBILE SOURCE ANALYSES

The mobile source analyses will consist of the following:

A. Gather existing air quality data. Collect and summarize existing ambient air quality data for

the study area. Specifically, ambient air quality monitoring data published by NYSDEC will

be compiled to establish background pollutant concentrations;

B. Determine receptor locations for the microscale analysis. Select critical intersection

locations based on the background and traffic volumes generated by the Proposed Action

and levels of service. At each intersection, multiple receptor sites will be analyzed in

accordance with CEQR guidelines;

C. Select dispersion model. The CAL3QHC screening model approved by the EPA will be

used. If necessary, EPA’s CAL3QHCR refined intersection model will be used at the more

sensitive CO receptor locations. For this analysis, five years of meteorological data from

LaGuardia Airport and concurrent upper air data from Brookhaven, New York will be

utilized for the simulation program;

D. Select emission calculation methodology and “worst-case” meteorological conditions.

Vehicular cruise and idle emissions for the dispersion modeling will be computed. For the

“worst-case” analysis of CO (at screening locations), conservative meteorological

conditions will be assumed in the dispersion modeling;

E. Select appropriate background levels. For the CO microscale analysis, select appropriate

background levels for the study area based on NYSDEC background monitoring data;

F. At each mobile source microscale receptor site, calculate maximum 1- and 8-hour CO

concentrations (and if warranted PM2.5 and PM10 levels) for existing conditions, the No

Action Condition, and the future with the Proposed Action. The analysis periods chosen

will be based on the peak hour project trips as analyzed in the traffic analysis;

G. Compare existing and future levels with standards and determine incremental change in

concentration. Future pollutant levels in the No Action Condition and in the future with the


Proposed Action will be compared with the NAAQS to determine compliance with

standards, and the City’s CO de minimis criteria will be employed to determine the impacts

of the Proposed Action; and

H. Determine the consistency of the Proposed Action with the strategies contained in the SIP

for the area. At any receptor sites where violations of standards occur, analyses would be

performed to determine what mitigation measures would be required to attain standards.

STATIONARY SOURCE ANALYSES

A. A field survey will be performed to determine if there are substantial sources of emission

within 400 feet of the project site. NYCDEP’s BEC files will be examined to determine if

there are permits for any industrial facilities that are identified. A review of federal and

state permits will also be conducted. The MTA QMT ventilation building is located adjacent

to the project site and will be included in this survey; and

B. Perform dispersion modeling to assess the potential for these sources to result in impacts

at the air intake for the CB.

CHAPTER 16 - GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

In accordance with the CEQR Technical Manual, GHG emissions generated by the

Proposed Action will be quantified, and an assessment of consistency with the City’s

established GHG reduction goal will be performed. Emissions will be estimated for the Analysis

Year and reported as CO2e metric tons per year. If the extent and duration of construction or

the expected use of materials is found to be potentially significant, construction-related

emissions would be quantified for the duration of construction. Relevant design features that

reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions will be discussed, and the potential for those

measures to reduce GHG emissions from the CB will be assessed to the extent practicable.

The GHG analysis will consist of the following subtasks:

A. Direct Emissions—GHG emissions from on-site boilers used for heat and hot water will be

quantified. Emissions will be based on available information regarding expected fuel use at


the project site;

B. Indirect Emissions—GHG emissions from purchased electricity and/or steam generated off-

site and consumed on-site during building operation will be estimated;

C. Indirect Mobile Source Emissions—GHG emissions from vehicle trips to and from the

project site will be quantified using trip distances and vehicle emission factors provided in

the CEQR Technical Manual;

D. Emissions from construction and emissions associated with the extraction or production of

construction materials will be qualitatively discussed; and

E. Consistency with the City’s GHG reduction goal will be assessed.

CHAPTER 17 - NOISE

The noise chapter will focus on assessing: (1) potential noise impacts due to project-

generated traffic; and (2) the level of attenuation needed in the CB to satisfy CEQR

requirements. Existing noise levels in the area immediately adjacent to the project site are

relatively high and reflect the level of activity (particularly vehicular activity) in the area. Autos,

taxis, and trucks, along with noise generated by aircraft flyovers, mechanical equipment, and

pedestrian activity, all contribute to the total ambient noise levels.

A noise study will be conducted at locations where proportional increases in traffic would

exceed the doubling threshold, as defined in the CEQR Technical Manual, requiring a detailed

noise analysis. The noise study would consist of the following tasks:

A. Select appropriate noise descriptors to describe the noise environment and the impact of the

CB. Where and when appropriate, examine the L10 and 1-hour equivalent (Leq(1)) noise

descriptors;

B. Select receptor locations for detailed analysis. Receptor sites analyzed will include noise-

sensitive receptor locations where the Proposed Action would have the greatest potential to

affect ambient noise levels;

C. Determine existing noise levels. Existing noise levels will be determined primarily by field


measurements. At each receptor site, 20-minute spot measurements will be made during

two time periods—weekday AM and PM peak peaks—which would correspond to the time

periods listed in the traffic analysis. Measurements will be made using a Type I noise

analyzer and would include measurements of Leq, L1, L10, L50, and L90, Lmax, and Lmin noise

levels. Measurements would screen out aircraft flyovers, sirens, and other atypical street

noise. Where necessary, measurements will be supplemented by mathematical model

results to determine an appropriate base of existing noise levels;

D. Determine future noise levels without the Proposed Action. At each receptor location

identified above, determine future noise levels without the Proposed Action using existing

noise levels, acoustical fundamentals, and mathematical models, including proportional

modeling techniques and/or the FHWA’s TNM, where appropriate. The methodology used

will allow for variations in vehicle/truck mixes;

E. Determine future noise levels with the Proposed Action. At each receptor location identified

above, determine noise levels with the Proposed Action using existing noise levels,

acoustical fundamentals, and mathematical models, including FHWA TNM, where

appropriate;

F. Compare noise levels with standards, and CEQR guidelines, and other impact evaluation

criteria. Compare existing noise levels and future noise levels, both with the Proposed

Action and in the No Action Condition, with various noise standards, guidelines, and other

noise criteria. In addition, based on the criteria contained in the CEQR Technical Manual,

future noise levels with the Proposed Action will be compared with future noise levels in the

No Action Condition to determine project impacts. Depending on the No Action noise levels,

a change of 3 to 5 A-weighted dBAs or more would be considered a significant impact; and

G. Assess the adequacy of building attenuation, taking into account CB design.


CHAPTER 18 - PUBLIC HEALTH

Following the guidelines in the CEQR Technical Manual, this task will provide a

screening assessment to examine the potential for construction and operation of the CB to

significantly impact public health. Drawing on other EIS sections, including air quality,

hazardous materials, and noise, this task will relate the findings in these chapters to known

public health concerns and summarize the potential for significant adverse impacts on public

health resulting from the Proposed Action.

CHAPTER 19 - NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER

Neighborhood character is determined by a number of factors, including land use

patterns, population characteristics and economic activities, the scale of development, the

design of buildings, the presence of notable landmarks, and a variety of other physical features

that include noise levels, traffic, and pedestrian patterns. The neighborhood character chapter

will consider whether the Proposed Action could affect any of the elements or any combination

of the elements that contribute to neighborhood character, and will assess the potential impact

of the Proposed Action on neighborhood character. CEQR impact categories that will be

considered in the neighborhood character assessment include land use, urban design, visual

resources, historic resources, socioeconomic conditions, traffic, and noise. Tasks include:

A. Based on other EIS sections, describe the predominant factors that contribute to defining the

character of the neighborhood surrounding the project site;

B. Based on planned development projects, public policy initiatives, and planned public

improvements, summarize changes that can be expected in neighborhood character in the

future without the Proposed Action; and

C. Assess and summarize the impact of the Proposed Action on neighborhood character using

the analysis of impacts as presented in other pertinent EIS sections (particularly urban design

and visual resources, historic resources, socioeconomic conditions, traffic, and noise).


CHAPTER 20 - CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

Construction impacts, though temporary, can have a disruptive and noticeable effect on

the adjacent community, as well as on people passing through the area. The likely construction

schedule at the project site and an estimate of on-site activity will be described. Construction

impacts will be evaluated according to CEQR Technical Manual guidelines. Included will be a

description of construction equipment performance requirements to address regulations to

control noise and air emissions during construction. The construction assessment for the

Proposed Action will focus on areas where construction activities extend more than two years,

and may pose specific environmental problems, and where the construction schedule of the

Proposed Action may overlap with the construction schedule of the electrical and mechanical

upgrade at the adjacent MTA QMT ventilation structure. Technical areas to be analyzed

include:

A. Transportation Systems. This assessment will consider the extent and duration of any

street, roadway, or sidewalk closure, any of which would be for temporary periods, any

impacts on the parking supply, and any loss in other transportation services during

construction. The requirements for the construction of the tunnel beneath 42nd Street

together with the access and staging requirements at the project site will be evaluated. In

addition, the assessment will identify the increase in vehicle trips from construction workers

and equipment. Travel demand assumptions and vehicle trip assignments for construction

workers will be developed, and trip assignments will be used to determine if any additional

traffic analysis locations outside of the traffic study area described in Chapter 14 will need

to be analyzed. Should a quantitative analysis be warranted, significant impacts will be

identified in accordance with CEQR Technical Manual guidelines, and potential mitigation

measures will be identified;


B. Traffic. If warranted, traffic conditions during construction will be quantified and evaluated,

including intersection v/c ratios, average delays, and levels of service. Significant traffic

impacts, if any, will be identified in accordance with CEQR Technical Manual guidelines;

C. Air Quality. The construction air quality impact section will contain a discussion of both

mobile air source emissions from construction equipment and worker and delivery vehicles,

and fugitive dust emissions. It will discuss measures to reduce or avoid the potential for

impacts;

D. Noise and Vibration. The construction noise impact section will evaluate the potential for

noise and vibration impacts as a result of discrete construction phase activity, and the

cumulative noise impact of the CB and pedestrian tunnel construction and rehabilitation of

the MTA QMT ventilation structure. It will discuss measures to reduce or avoid the potential

for impacts;

E. Hazardous Materials. In coordination with Chapter 10, determine the potential for

construction activity to expose construction workers to contaminants. Summarize actions to

be taken during construction to limit exposure to potential contaminants;

F. Historic Resources. The maintenance of the integrity of historic resources at or nearby the

project site that could be adversely affected by construction vibrations will be assessed; and

G. Other Technical Areas. As appropriate, the EIS will discuss use of the best available

technologies to mitigate construction impacts and will discuss construction-related impacts,

of concern in other areas of environmental assessment.

CHAPTER 21 - ALTERNATIVES

The purpose of an alternatives analysis is to examine reasonable and practicable

options that avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Action and achieve the

stated goals and objectives of the Proposed Action. The specific alternatives to be analyzed are

typically finalized with the lead agency as possible adverse impacts become clarified. However,

they would at least include a No Action Alternative, which will be analyzed in detail throughout


the EIS and used as the basis for comparison with the Proposed Action in each environmental

impact category. The No Action Alternative would portray conditions in the Analysis Year,

assuming that the Proposed Action would not advance and that the western portion of Robert

Moses Playground would continue without change from today.

Other than the No Action Alternative, the DEIS will discuss the following possible

changes that may occur in the design and construction of the Consolidation Project. First, a “No

Tunnel Alternative” will be analyzed in which the Consolidation Project would not include a

tunnel under East 42nd Street to provide a below grade connection between UN Headquarters

and the CB for movement of UN personnel other than by automobile. Second, an alternative

use of space in the CB will be analyzed in which office space for use by UN employees would

be increased, with the number of UN employees accommodated in the CB increasing from

2,700 to as much as 3,100, and in which space for ancillary activities would be reduced; the

height and total square footage of the CB would not change.

In addition, the DEIS will discuss the absence of alternatives that would address the

purpose and need for the CB, including the absence of alternative suitable sites and the lack by

UNDC of corporate power under the current UNDC enabling legislation to provide additional

office space to meet the UN’s needs at any location other than the project site.

The discussion will be at a level of detail sufficient to assess each of the alternatives.

CHAPTER 22 - EIS SUMMARY CHAPTERS

A. Executive Summary—The executive summary will utilize relevant material from the body of

the EIS to describe the Proposed Action; the necessary approvals for the Proposed Action;

the study area or areas for assessing potential impacts; the environmental impacts predicted

to occur; measures to mitigate those impacts; unmitigated and unavoidable impacts (if any);

and alternatives to the Proposed Action;

B. Mitigation Measures—Where significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Action have been

identified in the analyses discussed above, any practicable measures that have the potential


to avoid or mitigate those impacts will be identified. This section summarizes the findings of

the relevant analyses and discusses potential mitigation measures. Where adverse impacts

cannot be mitigated, they will be described as unavoidable adverse impacts;

C. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts—Any significant impacts for which no mitigation can be put

forth or implemented will be presented as unavoidable adverse impacts;

D. Growth-Inducing Aspects of the Proposed Action—Any growth-inducing aspects of the

Proposed Action, focusing on whether they are expected to trigger further development, will

be described; and

E. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources—This section summarizes the

Proposed Action and its impact in terms of the loss of environmental resources, both in the

immediate future and the long term.


! " # $ % & $' ( ) * + , ( - * ) . ( /0 + - , 1 ' - 2 * + 2 /3 . 4 5 6 + 7

8 9 : : ; < = > ? @ A B C ; A 9 ; ; : DE F G H I J K L FE F G M N J K L FE F G O K L K L F

E F G G L P K L FE F G Q L P K L FE F G R L P K L F

E F G S L P K L FE F H T L P K L FE F H U L P K L FE F H V L P K L FE F H R L P K L F

WXYZ[\]^X[_X `abWc]^X[_Xd e f e f g h ij k l m n o pq r p n s t uv w x uy z { | } { x ~

� � � �� ¡ � ¢ � � � £ � � ¤

¥¦§¥¨§©¦¥©

ª « ¬ « ® ¯ ° ± ² ³ ´ ² µ ¶ ® ° · ¸ ¹ ¬ º ª ² » « ° ¬ ¼ ² ½ ¬ ® ¾ ¿ ½ ¾ ® ° ¼ « ¬ ¹ ® ½ À Á ² ± Â ½ ® Ã ® Ä º À « ½ Å Á ² Ã ² ± ® ¼ ¼ ¯ ½ ¹ ± « ¬ ¹ ® ½ Æ À Ç È É Ç ÊË Ì Í Í Î Ï Ð Ñ Ò Ó Ô Õ Ñ Í

United Nations Consolidation Building

August 12, 2013

MAKI AND ASSOCIATES

abennett

Rectangle

abennett

Typewritten Text

Figure 2 - View of CB and UN Headquarters Complex from the East River

HEIGHT: MEDIUM [546’ – ”HEIGHT:

CROWN:

FORM:

COLOR:

MEDIUM [546 –

ABSTRACT

SIMPLE

WHITE

TEXTURE: WHITE GLASS

TRANSPARENT

TRANSLUCENT

Maki and Associates I FX Fowle Architects Perspective

0 ]

Figure 3

MAXIMUM BUILDING ENVELOPEFIGURE 4

1st Avenue42nd Street

41st Street

197’- 6”

130’- 0”

16’- 0 ”

EL: [ +546’-0 ]

AXON

ELEVATION PER BOROUGH PRESIDENT OF MANHATTAN DATUM (BPMD)

42ND STREET 41ST STREET

UNLIBRARY

SEC.

FIRST AVENUE

Maki and Associates I FX Fowle Architects FIGURE 6: Ground Floor Plan

LOADING DOCK

STAFFENTRANCE

BICYCLE STORAGE

KITCHENSTAFF

FACILITYB.O.H.

VISITORENTRANCE

LOBBY

LOGGIA

AUDITORIUM

FOYER

CONCESSIONCONCESSION

Maki and Associates I FX Fowle Architects FIGURE 7: Second Floor Plan

MAILRM

! " # $ % & $' ( ) * + , - . * ) / ( 01 + . , 2 3 . 4 * + 4 05 / 6 7 8 + 9: ; < < = > ? @ A B C D E = C ; = = < F

G H I J K L M N HG H I O P L M N HG H I Q M N M N HG H I I N R M N HG H I S N R M N HG H I T N R M N H

G H I U N R M N HG H J V N R M N HG H J W N R M N HG H J X N R M N HG H J T N R M N H

YZ[\]^_`Z]aZ bcdYe_`Z]aZ f g h g h i j k

G H J S N R M N HG H J I N R M N H

elcd^_`Z]aZ m n o p q r st u s q

v w v vx w vy z z {| } ~ � � � � � � � �� } � � � ~ � � � � } �� ~ � � � } � � � � � � � � � � � � �� ~ � � � } � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� } � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � } � � �� } � � � � ~ } � � � � ~ � � � � � � � � � � �| � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ~ � �� ~ ~ } � � � } � � � � ~ �| � } � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� ¡ ¢ £ ¤ ¥ ¦ ¢ ¡ § ¨© § ¨ § ª ¡ ¤ ¦ ¢ ¡ § « ¬ ¡ ª ¤ ¡ ® ¯ ¦ ° ¢ ± ² § ³ £ § ° ´ § ¯ µ

¶·¸¹·º»¸º

¼ ½ ¾ ½ ¿ À Á Â Ã Ä Å Æ Ä Ç È À Â É Ê Ë ¾ Ì ¼ Ä Í ½ Â ¾ Î Ä Ï ¾ À Ð Ê Ë ¾ Ì Ñ Ò ½ Ï Ï Ë Ï Ó Ô Õ ½ Í Ñ Ö × Ø Ù Ú Û Ü Ý Ü Þ ß Ë Ä Ò à á Ä Â Ë Ð Ë Ä à â Ì ã ¼ ä À Ï Ü å æ Û Ý æ Ý Û Þ

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

! " # $ % & $' ( ) * + , - . * ) / ( 01 + . , 2 3 . 4 * + 4 05 / 6 7 8 + 9: ; < < = ! " # $ % & ' = % ; = = < (

) * + , - . / 0 *) * + 1 2 . / 0 *) * + 3 / 0 / 0 *) * + + 0 4 / 0 *) * + 5 0 4 / 0 *) * + 6 0 4 / 0 *

) * + 7 0 4 / 0 *) * , 8 0 4 / 0 *) * , 9 0 4 / 0 *) * , : 0 4 / 0 *) * , 6 0 4 / 0 *

;<=>?@AB<?C< DEF;GAB<?C< H I J I J K L M

) * , 5 0 4 / 0 *) * , + 0 4 / 0 *

GNEF@AB<?C<

O P - QO P - QTA

TA

U

R S T U V W XY Z X VTA U

MiD

[AF\] ^ _ ` [AF\ ] ^ _ `] ^ _ `

] ^ _ `

a b a ac b ad e e fg h i j k l m n o m kn m p q r s h k t u i p v q t h r w i v o v x y o z m h o l mn { k l o t | g p h { i z k y o z m h o l m } ~ � � } i � � k h l o t | � � k h | t r

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

} � � � } i � � k h l o t | � � k h | t r� � � � � � � � � � � � ��

�� ¡�

¢ £ ¤ £ ¥ ¦ § ¨ © ª « ¬ ª ® ¦ ¨ ¯ ° ± ¤ ² ¢ ª ³ £ ¨ ¤ ´ ª µ ¤ ¦ ¶ ° ± ¤ ² · ¸ £ µ µ ± µ ¹ º » £ µ § £ ¨ ² º ¼ ½ ¾ ¼ ¿

List of Abbreviations and Defined Terms

2011 Legislation Chapter 137 of the 2011 Laws of New York

Analysis Year 2018 (the year of estimated construction completion and occupancy of the United Nations Consolidation Building)

ASTs Above ground storage tanks ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATR Automatic Traffic Recorder

BEC New York City Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Environmental Compliance

Build (scenario) Future Conditions with the Proposed Action CB The UN Consolidation Building

CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System

CEQR City Environmental Quality Review CHASP Construction Phase Environmental Health and Safety Plan City The City of New York CMP United Nations Capital Master Plan CO Carbon Monoxide CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent CPC City Planning Commission of The City of New York Consolidation Project The UN Consolidation Project City Council The City Council of The City of New York CTTP Central Transportation Planning Package CZMA Federal Coastal Zone Management Act CZMP Coastal Zone Management Plan dBA Decibels DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement DSNY New York City Department of Sanitation EAF Environmental Assessment Form EEHA East End Hockey Association EIS Environmental Impact Statement EMS New York City Emergency Medical Services EMT Emergency Medical Technicians EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency ESA Environmental Site Assessment FDNY New York City Fire Department FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement FHWA Federal Highway Administration GHG Greenhouse gas gsf gross square feet HCM Highway Capacity Manual

47

LIRR Long Island Railroad

L1 Noise level in dBA exceeded one percent of the observation time

L10 Noise level in dBA exceeded 10 percent of the observation time



Leq(1) Sound level in dBA over a period of one hour Lmax Maximum sound level in dBA Lmin Minimum sound level in dBA MGP Manufactured gas plant

MOU Memorandum of Understanding referred to in 2011 Legislation

MSW Municipal Solid Waste MTA Metropolitan Transportation Authority NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NHL National Historic Landmark No Action (scenario) Future Conditions without the Proposed Action No Build (scenario) Future Conditions without the Proposed Action NYCDCP New York City Department of City Planning NYCDEP New York City Department of Environmental Protection NYCDOT New York City Department of Transportation NYCDPR New York City Department of Parks and Recreation NYCHD New York City Historic District NYCL New York City Landmark NYCLPC New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission NYCT New York City Transit NYMTC New York Metropolitan Transportation Council NYPD New York City Police Department NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYSDOH New York State Department of Health NYSDOS New York State Department of State

OPRHP New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation

PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls PCEs Passenger Car Equivalents PHF Peak Hour Factors

PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns equivalent aerodynamic diameter

48

PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 microns equivalent aerodynamic diameter

project site

The portion of Manhattan Tax Block 1353, Tax Lot 1, with a surface area of approximately 28,850 sf, known as 724 First Avenue in the Borough of Manhattan in the City, bounded on the west by the east side of United Nations Plaza (First Avenue); on the south by the north side of East 41st Street; on the north by the south side of East 42nd Street; and on the east by a line that begins on the north side of East 41st Street, is located 146 feet seven eighths inches east of and parallel to United Nations Plaza (First Avenue) and runs north for a distance of 197 feet six inches, ending at the south side of East 42nd Street. This eastern boundary of the project site is the same as the western boundary of the land on which the QMT ventilation structure is located and the western boundary of the portion of the Robert Moses Playground – occupied by a dog run – immediately north of the land on which the QMT ventilation structure is located.

Proposed Action Development by UNDC of the Consolidation Project, principally on the project site

QMT Queens-Midtown Tunnel RCRIS Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System RSCOs Recommended soil cleanup objectives SEQRA State Environmental Quality Review Act sf square feet SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SIP State Implementation Plan S/NR State/National Register (of Historic Places) SVOCs Semi-volatile organic compounds SWMP New York City Solid Waste Management Plan TAL Target Analyte List TCL Target Compound List TMC Turning Movement Count TNM Traffic Noise Model

ULURP Uniform Land Use Review Procedure pursuant to Section 197-c of the Charter of The City of New York

UN United Nations

UN District United Nations Development District established in the New York State Legislation creating UNDC

UN District Zoning Article VIII, Chapter 5 of the Zoning Resolution UN Plaza Buildings One, Two and Three UN Plaza UNDC United Nations Development Corporation

UNDHSSS UN Division of Headquarters of Security and Safety Services

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

49

USCG United States Coast Guard USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey USTs Underground Storage Tanks v/c volume-to-capacity (ratio) VOC Volatile organic compounds With Action (scenario) Future Conditions with the Proposed Action WPCP Water Pollution Control Plant WRP Waterfront Revitalization Program Zoning Resolution The Zoning Resolution of the City of New York

50

draft scope of work for the preparation of an ... · fumihiko maki and fx fowle team, particularly...

Documents