executive summary...queens borough public library – sunnyside branch anne bagnall, community...

Kosciuszko Bridge Project ES-1 March 2007

Executive Summary The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), has prepared this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to evaluate the rehabilitation or replacement of the Kosciuszko Bridge, which carries a 1.1-mile segment of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE, Interstate 278) from Morgan Avenue in the borough of Brooklyn (Kings County) to the Long Island Expressway (LIE, Interstate 495) interchange in the borough of Queens (Queens County), as shown in Figure ES-1. The bridge carries BQE traffic over Newtown Creek, which forms the border between Brooklyn and Queens in this area. While the BQE is signed as an east-west route, the highway is one of New York City’s few north-south interstates, serving a high volume of commuter and local traffic as well as a significant amount of truck traffic, which is prohibited from neighboring parkways. Improvements are needed to address transportation, safety and structural deficiencies currently affecting the bridge.

A. INTRODUCTION

This DEIS has been prepared to meet all the requirements of both the federal National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR). This document also fulfills all requirements of the following regulations:

Section 4(f) (49 United States Code [USC] 303) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966; and

Section 6(f) (16 USC 4601-4 to 4601-11) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965.

The implementation of each of the project’s Build Alternatives has the potential to significantly affect the environment. As such, this project is a Class I project under NEPA as defined in Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 771, Section 771.115 and a Non-Type II (EIS) project under SEQR as defined in Title 17 of the New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 15.

The purpose of the NEPA process is to examine and consider the potential impact on the human and natural environment of all federally funded projects so that informed decisions can be made regarding the commitment of resources. Following publication of the DEIS, all interested parties will have the opportunity to comment upon its findings. These comments will be taken into consideration in the selection of a preferred alternative to be identified in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). The FEIS will serve as NYSDOT’s recommendation of an alternative to FHWA for final approval in a Record of Decision (ROD).

The DEIS has been distributed directly to all those who requested a copy prior to publication and copies have been placed in each of the project’s repositories (see Table ES-1). Additional copies may be requested by contacting Robert Adams, P.E., NYSDOT Project Manager, at the

Draft Environmental Impact Statement Executive Summary


address listed in Section I. The document is also available on the NYSDOT website: www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/regional-offices/region11/projects/kosciuszko-bridge-project.

TABLE ES-1: PROJECT REPOSITORIES TO WHICH DEIS WAS SENT

Location Contact Name Phone

Brooklyn Borough President’s Office* Michael Rossmy 718-802-3700

Brooklyn Community Board #1* Gerald Esposito, District Manager 718-389-0009

Brooklyn Public Library - Greenpoint Branch Mel Gooch, Branch Librarian 718-349-8504

Brooklyn Public Library - Leonard Branch Morris Denmark, Branch Librarian 718-486-3365

Queens Borough President’s Office* Mark Scott 718-286-2828

Queens Community Board #2* Debra Markell, District Manager 718-533-8773

Queens Community Board #5* Gary Giordano, District Manager 718-366-1834

Queens Borough Public Library – Maspeth Branch Usha Pinto, Community Library Manager 718-639-5228

Queens Borough Public Library – Sunnyside Branch Anne Bagnall, Community Library Manager

718-784-3033

New York State Department of Transportation* Robert Adams, P.E., Project Manager 718-482-4683

Parsons* Anthony Lee, AICP, Consultant Team Project Manager

212-266-8507

Note: Sites marked with an asterisk (*) should be contacted in advance to schedule an appointment to view the documents. All sites are handicapped accessible.

B. PUBLIC OUTREACH AND AGENCY COORDINATION

The public outreach and agency coordination program for the Kosciuszko Bridge Project was established to ensure that the project would be supported by a comprehensive and extensive program of public outreach and involvement activities. The program’s principal objective was to facilitate open lines of communication and information-sharing, active engagement, and maximum participation of the public throughout the scoping process, Alternatives Analysis, and development of the DEIS. This was achieved through a cooperative approach that involved city, state, regional and federal agencies; elected officials; community boards; civic organizations; residents; business interests; regional transportation and environmental groups; and other interested stakeholders and constituencies.

Early in the project, NYSDOT created a Stakeholders Advisory Committee (SAC), representing all potentially affected stakeholders, that would advise the Project Team throughout the DEIS process. The committee includes representatives of elected officials, key agencies, civic organizations, business associations, community boards, and regional transportation interests. The committee, which has met 32 times since the project’s inception, has assisted the Project Team in the development of goals and objectives for the project, screening alternatives, reviewing project data, and providing input into a wide range of project design issues. Finally, the SAC has played a crucial role in the public outreach program, serving as ambassadors to the community at large and sharing local concerns with the Project Team.

Coordination with other agencies has occurred throughout the process through an Inter-Agency Advisory Committee (IAAC) and through numerous meetings and correspondence. The IAAC



includes representatives of federal, regional, state, and local agencies; utility companies; and the SAC. It has met roughly annually during the scoping and Alternatives Analysis phases of the project to discuss progress, raise issues, and facilitate inter-agency coordination. In addition to the IAAC, when relevant, the Project Team met individually with agencies to discuss specific issues under their jurisdiction. More than 20 meetings and 20 letters ensured that agencies remained up-to-date on the project and that the DEIS would meet the regulatory needs of each agency.

In an effort to gather information from as many stakeholders as possible, the Project Team reached out to the public by means of a wide variety of techniques, including: public scoping meetings (two), open houses (nine), small group meetings (40), site visits and meetings with local businesses (29), bus tours (three), and a project mailing list of over 800 individuals and organizations to notify stakeholders and constituencies of upcoming meetings and to distribute informational materials. These included a fact sheet, newsletters (two), and Frequently Asked Questions documents. In addition, 11 project repositories and a website were established and regularly updated to provide public access to project documents.

C. PROJECT HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

The Kosciuszko Bridge, named after the Polish-born Revolutionary War hero Thaddeus Kosciuszko, was completed and opened to traffic on August 24, 1939. Built prior to the BQE and the LIE, the bridge connected to Meeker Avenue between Morgan and Kingsland Avenues in Brooklyn and to Laurel Hill Boulevard near 54th Road in Queens. The first section of the BQE, between the Williamsburg and Kosciuszko Bridges, was completed in 1950, with the rest of the highway completed by 1960. Reconstruction efforts in the 1960s created the existing ramp configuration at the BQE/LIE interchange and eliminated the two sidewalks on the bridge.

Over the past two decades NYSDOT has spent considerable time and effort maintaining the Kosciuszko Bridge in safe working order, resulting in both significant expenditures and disruption to traffic operations. Most recently, between July 2005 and December 2006, NYSDOT completed a $6 million resurfacing and deck repair project in an effort to keep the bridge operating safely until a more permanent solution can be implemented.

Based on biennial inspections that found the overall condition of the viaduct to be “poor” to “fair,” NYSDOT initiated the Kosciuszko Bridge Traffic Operations Study, which considered alternatives to rehabilitate the bridge, with and without the construction of a new adjacent bridge. The study, published in 1995, found that, while, from a structural standpoint, the bridge could be rehabilitated in thirds by closing two lanes at a time, the local street network was incapable of handling the diverted traffic. It also found that, without any additional capacity, operating conditions on the existing bridge would continue to deteriorate, resulting in severe congestion on the highway and several ramps. Upon its review of the potential impacts of the proposed project, FHWA and NYSDOT concluded that it was appropriate to prepare a DEIS to identify and evaluate the transportation, social, economic and environmental impacts of possible solutions.

D. PROJECT SETTING

The Kosciuszko Bridge is located within a dense urban area, with a mix of industrial, manufacturing, and residential land uses. In Brooklyn, the area south of the Kosciuszko Bridge



is predominantly industrial and manufacturing from Kingsland Avenue to Newtown Creek, with a few clusters of row houses south of Lombardy Street. There is also a public park, Sergeant William Dougherty Playground, located at the corner of Vandervoort Avenue and Cherry Street. North of the Kosciuszko Bridge, between Kingsland Avenue and Van Dam Street, residential uses dominate with some ground floor retail uses in the properties fronting on Meeker Avenue. East of Van Dam Street, uses are entirely industrial and manufacturing. In Queens, land uses are predominantly manufacturing and industrial with a handful of residential properties scattered throughout the area and Calvary Cemetery located to the west of the Kosciuszko Bridge.

The existing roadway section on the Kosciuszko Bridge consists of a divided travelway with a total of six through lanes (three eastbound and three westbound). The bridge is constructed of several different structure types along the length of the project, consisting of the following:

Brooklyn Connector –low level concrete viaduct with closure walls between Morgan Avenue and Varick Avenue in Brooklyn;

Brooklyn Approach – steel deck truss between Varick Avenue and Newtown Creek in Brooklyn;

Main Span –steel through truss over Newtown Creek; and

Queens Approach –steel deck truss between Newtown Creek and the LIE interchange in Queens.

E. NEED FOR THE PROJECT

The Kosciuszko Bridge suffers from a number of safety, operational, and structural deficiencies described below that, if not addressed, will continue to worsen, exacerbating existing problems.

E.1. Safety

The design of the existing highway within the project limits results in an elevated accident rate – as much as six and a half times the statewide average for similar facilities. The following sections describe the features of the existing highway and the safety problems to which they contribute.

E.1.a. Insufficient Shoulders

Throughout the project limits, the shoulders on the BQE and ramps are insufficient to provide safe refuge for disabled vehicles. While the standard is 3.0 m (10 ft), the right shoulder of the BQE ranges from 1.52 m (5’-0”) on the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches to as little as 152 mm (6”) on the Main Span. Throughout the project limits, the left shoulder is 0.3 m (1’-0”), instead of the standard 1.2 m (4 ft). Similar conditions apply on the ramps as well, where shoulders are generally 0.61 m (2’-0”) or less. With frequent accidents on the bridge, disabled vehicles are forced to remain in travel lanes, which impedes traffic flow and endangers the occupants of the disabled vehicle and other vehicles on the BQE.



E.1.b. Narrow Lanes

The travel lanes on the Main Span of the Kosciuszko Bridge narrow from standard 3.6 m (12 ft) wide lanes on the approaches to 3.3 m (10’-10”). The reduced lane widths, combined with non-standard shoulders and sight distances, are the main contributing factors for the frequency of accidents at this location. Of the accidents reported at this location over a two-year period for the eastbound and westbound directions, 93 percent were attributed to rear-end and overtaking collisions. These two types of accidents are good indicators of non-standard conditions where traffic is either being forced to slow down or make last-second lane changes.

E.1.c. Insufficient Acceleration/Deceleration Lanes

While not a critical design element, insufficient acceleration/deceleration lanes increase the likelihood of accidents as vehicles are forced to merge into or out of traffic traveling at a significantly different speed. The existing acceleration lanes at the Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp (38 m [124′-8"]) and the westbound BQE entrance ramp from the LIE (27 m [88′-7"]) are 15 and 11 percent, respectively, of the recommended 255 m (838’-7”). Likewise the existing deceleration lane at the Meeker Avenue/Morgan Avenue exit ramp (20 m [65′-7"]) is 15 percent of the recommended 135 m (443’-11”).

Due to physical constraints, it is unlikely that standard acceleration/deceleration lanes can be provided. However, such drastically insufficient acceleration/deceleration lanes have a clear effect on accidents. The Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp has an accident rate 30 times the statewide average for similar entrance ramps. The westbound entrance ramp from the LIE and exit ramp to Meeker Avenue/Morgan Avenue have accident rates of five and nine times the state average for similar ramps, respectively.

E.1.d. Non-Standard Stopping Sight Distance

Sight distance is the length of the roadway ahead that is visible to a driver. Stopping sight distance combines this distance with the design speed of the roadway to determine how far in advance a driver must see an obstruction (e.g. a disabled vehicle in his or her path) in order to stop before hitting it. There are two types of stopping sight distance: horizontal and vertical. Because of the curving nature of the BQE in this area and the lack of shoulders (which provide a broader field of vision), there is insufficient horizontal stopping sight distance along much of the roadway within the project limits. Additionally, the bridge has insufficient vertical stopping sight distance at the Main Span. Combined with frequent obstructions caused by accidents and inconsistent traffic flow due to congestion, this insufficient stopping sight distance can lead to additional accidents on the highway.

E.2. Operational

The expressway and local street network in the Kosciuszko Bridge Project study area currently operate with appreciable delay during peak hours. Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of operational conditions of a roadway, based on service measures such as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, and convenience. Letters are used to designate the six levels of LOS, from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Most locations on the mainline BQE operate at LOS D or worse during both peak hours, with LOS E or F prevailing at many locations. Many of the ramps in this area also operate at LOS E or F during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In addition,



many turning movements and approaches along Meeker Avenue currently operate at unacceptable levels of service.

Future operating conditions are expected to deteriorate with more locations operating at unacceptable levels of service. Delays and travel time would increase as demand for the already congested highway facilities grows. Additional highway and ramp elements would operate at LOS E or F and existing areas of poor operation would worsen.

At a system level, Vehicle Hours of Delay (VHD), a measure of total delay experienced by all vehicles along the BQE/Meeker Avenue network, would deteriorate from existing levels.

The poor operating conditions on the bridge result from both capacity and geometric deficiencies. Many of the factors discussed above related to safety concerns also contribute to operational problems: insufficient shoulders and acceleration/deceleration lanes, narrow lanes, and non-standard stopping sight distance, all contribute to slow speeds and congestion. In addition, with medium and heavy trucks representing as much as 18 percent of vehicles entering the BQE during peak hours within the project limits, the grade of the existing roadway, over 4% in some areas, compounds these operational problems. Large trucks entering the highway have difficulties accelerating on such grades and, combined with the insufficient acceleration lanes, are unable to smoothly merge with highway traffic, forcing all traffic to slow.

E.3. Structural

The Kosciuszko Bridge is over 65 years old and has been subjected to significantly higher traffic volumes than it was designed to carry. When it was built the Kosciuszko Bridge connected Meeker Avenue in Brooklyn, a 4-lane arterial, to Laurel Hill Boulevard in Queens, also a 4-lane arterial. With the construction of the BQE a decade later, the Kosciuszko Bridge became an integral part of the interstate highway system and today carries over 160,000 vehicles across Newtown Creek each day.

This change in use over the last half century has taken its toll on the structure. Despite a series of interim repairs over the last fifteen years, the structural condition of the Kosciuszko Bridge is deteriorating. The most recent inspection report indicates that several structural elements of the bridge exhibit severe deterioration and require repair or full replacement. The failure of the longitudinal joint under the median barrier and all the transverse joints has allowed water to leak through the deck causing its deterioration and corrosion of many of the steel members below. Finally, several of the concrete columns supporting the bridge show signs of deterioration in the form of hollow sounding concrete and cracks and spalls in the pier cap beams. The 2002 Biennial Inspection Report evaluated the structure and concluded that there is moderate deterioration of primary and secondary members and the substructure, and that considerable rehabilitation is required.

A separate evaluation found that the structure is vulnerable to failure from loads or events that could occur and that action should be taken to reduce these vulnerabilities. Specifically, welded connections between the crossbeams and the steel deck and between the crossbeams and the stringers on the approach spans and the Main Span were found to be vulnerable. Additionally, the vertical clearance under the bridge at 54th Road (4.1 m [13'-4"]) and 54th Avenue (4.3 m [14'-0"]) in Queens is insufficient for large trucks.

The structural condition of the Main Span and approach spans is such that complete replacement of the deck, crossbeams and stringers is required in order to rehabilitate the



structure. The structural condition of the Brooklyn Connector requires complete replacement of the superstructure. Due to the nature of the monolithic reinforced concrete structure of the Brooklyn Connector, replacement of the substructure will be required to replace the superstructure.

F. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Working closely with the SAC, the Project Team developed a series of goals and objectives for the project. Seven broad goals were identified, each supplemented with several more specific objectives. The goals, which provided the basis for the development and evaluation of alternatives include:

For all modes of transportation, improve mobility, safety, and access, and reduce congestion within the study area.

Protect and/or enhance the environment, including natural resources and open space.

Protect and/or enhance the integrity of residential neighborhoods.

Maintain the viability of institutional and business communities.

Protect and/or enhance cultural, historic, and archaeological resources.

Recognize the interrelationships between land use and transportation.

Provide an open, inclusive, transparent and responsive EIS process that includes a proactive, comprehensive, and ongoing public participation program.

G. COMPARISON/DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

NEPA requires that all reasonable alternatives be considered in the DEIS. NYSDOT completed an Alternatives Analysis process designed to consider a wide range of alternatives and to narrow that list down to a manageable number for detailed study in the DEIS. The purpose of the Alternatives Analysis process was to identify alternatives consistent with the project’s goals and objectives.

G.1. Alternatives Considered

During the public scoping process (November 2001 to July 2002), NYSDOT gathered comments and suggestions for alternatives through Public Scoping Meetings and small group meetings with elected officials, community groups, and business organizations. These suggestions were combined with recommendations from the Project Team’s internal studies to create an original “Long List” of alternatives. The following guidelines were considered in the development of the Long List of alternatives:

Each alternative should maintain all present access locations and highway connections, or their equivalents.



All of the alternatives must maintain a minimum of six lanes of traffic during most of the day and evening (three in each direction) throughout construction. These six lanes may be on the existing structure, on new structure, or on temporary structure.

Property impacts should be minimized as much as practical, potentially by locating temporary or new structures over existing streets.

The Long List of alternatives consisted of 26 alternatives – the required No Build Alternative and 25 Build Alternatives. These included:

No Build Alternative – serves as a baseline for comparison;

Rehabilitation Alternatives (3) – would rehabilitate the existing structure in kind;

Rehabilitation with Auxiliary Lanes Alternatives (7) – would rehabilitate the existing structure and add lanes between the entrance and exit ramps in Brooklyn and Queens by widening the existing structure or constructing a new permanent structure on one side of the existing bridge;

Bridge Replacement Alternatives (12) – would replace the existing bridge with a new bridge; and

Tunnel Alternatives (3) – would replace the existing bridge with a tunnel.

The Long List of alternatives was evaluated through a two-step process designed to select the alternatives most likely to satisfy the project’s purpose and need. Each step in this iterative evaluation process was designed to focus increasingly detailed analysis on progressively fewer alternatives. The alternatives that emerged at the end of the screening process (Alternatives RA-5, RA-6, BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5) were analyzed in detail in this DEIS.

G.2. DEIS Alternative Development

With the list of Build Alternatives narrowed to five, further engineering, traffic, and environmental studies could be completed and the alternatives developed to a preliminary design level.

G.2.a. No Build Alternative

The No Build Alternative, shown in Figure ES-2, would make no physical or operational improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge, but continues NYSDOT’s ongoing maintenance program. The existing bridge, with its three eastbound and three westbound lanes, steep grades, narrow lane widths, and non-standard shoulders, would remain as it is today. Provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists would not be provided.

G.2.b. Build Alternatives

Because each of the Build Alternatives was designed to address the project’s goals and objectives, many of the elements of each are similar or identical. The following are features common to the Build Alternatives:



Any new structures would be built approximately 11 m (35 ft) lower than the existing bridge at the Main Span over Newtown Creek, allowing grades and vertical sight distance to be improved;

A temporary bridge would be built over the travel lanes of eastbound Meeker Avenue between Morgan Avenue and Porter Avenue to allow for the reconstruction of the Brooklyn Connector;

A two lane Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp to the eastbound BQE and at least one eastbound auxiliary lane would be constructed to improve merging between the entrance ramp and the LIE interchange;

At least one westbound auxiliary lane would be constructed to improve merging between the LIE interchange and the Meeker Avenue/Morgan Avenue exit ramp;

Transportation of construction materials and equipment to the site would be accomplished by barge to temporary loading platforms on each side of Newtown Creek in order to minimize traffic impacts on local streets; and

“From above” construction techniques, which utilize cranes attached to previously constructed sections of the bridge, would be used to minimize the need to place cranes either on private property or on local streets.

The following sections describe specific details about each of the Build Alternatives.

ALTERNATIVE RA-5

Alternative RA-5, shown in Figure ES-3, would rehabilitate the existing bridge and construct a new parallel bridge on the eastbound side. When completed, the new bridge would carry three lanes of eastbound traffic with standard lane widths and shoulders. The existing bridge would be rehabilitated and continue to carry six lanes of traffic (two eastbound, four westbound), maintaining the existing narrow lane widths, non-standard (narrow) shoulders, and steep grades. The parallel bridge would be built first, so that six lanes of traffic could be maintained while the existing bridge is rehabilitated, half at a time. A temporary bridge would be required in Queens over Laurel Hill Boulevard between 54th Avenue and 55th Avenue. Construction of this alternative would take approximately 45 months and cost $559 million.

ALTERNATIVE RA-6

Alternative RA-6, shown in Figure ES-4, would rehabilitate the existing bridge and construct a new parallel bridge on the westbound side. When completed, the new bridge would carry three lanes of westbound traffic with standard lane widths and shoulders. The existing bridge would be rehabilitated and continue to carry six lanes of traffic (two westbound, four eastbound), maintaining the existing narrow lane widths, non-standard (narrow) shoulders, and steep grades. The parallel bridge would be built first, so that six lanes of traffic could be maintained while the existing bridge is rehabilitated, half at a time. A temporary bridge would be required in Queens adjacent to the eastbound side of the bridge between 54th Avenue and 55th Avenue. Construction of this alternative would take approximately 45 months and cost $515 million.



ALTERNATIVE BR-2

Alternative BR-2, shown in Figure ES-5, would replace the existing bridge by building new parallel bridges on both sides of the existing bridge – one temporary, one permanent. The existing bridge would then be demolished and new bridge structures would be built in its place. When completed, the new bridges would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. Construction of the parallel bridges would allow six lanes of traffic to be maintained while the existing bridge is demolished and the alternative completed. Construction of this alternative would take approximately 72 months and cost $712 million.

ALTERNATIVE BR-3

Alternative BR-3, shown in Figure ES-6, would replace the existing bridge by building new parallel bridges on both sides of the existing bridge. The existing bridge would then be demolished and new bridge structures would be built in its place. When completed, the new bridges would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. Construction of the parallel bridges would allow six lanes of traffic to be maintained while the existing bridge is demolished and the alternative completed. Construction of this alternative would take approximately 60 months and cost $692 million.

ALTERNATIVE BR-5

Alternative BR-5, shown in Figure ES-7, would replace the existing bridge by building two new parallel bridges on the eastbound side of the existing bridge. The existing bridge would then be demolished and a new bridge structure would be built in its place. When completed, the new bridges would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. Construction of the parallel bridges would allow six lanes of traffic to be maintained while the existing bridge is demolished and the alternative completed. A temporary bridge would be required in Queens over Laurel Hill Boulevard between 54th Avenue and 55th Avenue. Construction of this alternative would take approximately 60 months and cost $630 million.

H. POTENTIAL IMPACTS

This section briefly summarizes the transportation, social, economic and environmental impacts expected for each alternative. Table ES-2, located at the end of this section, summarizes these findings.

H.1. Transportation Impacts

Each of the Build Alternatives would add auxiliary lanes to the bridge, connecting the entrance and exit ramps in Brooklyn with the corresponding ramps in Queens, either through construction of a new bridge parallel to the existing one, or through the complete replacement of the bridge. This would result in significant operational improvements on the BQE within the project limits. These auxiliary lanes would help remove the existing bottleneck that occurs between the Brooklyn ramps and the LIE Interchange in Queens, by reducing merging and weaving movements, reducing congestion and increasing average speeds, which would result in fewer delays.



Significant improvements would also be achieved at Meeker Avenue intersections between McGuinness Boulevard/Humboldt Street and Vandervoort Avenue/Apollo Street where improved operations on the BQE and the Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp, combined with mitigation measures included in the Build Alternatives, would have positive effects on travel on Meeker Avenue. The most significant improvements would be realized at the McGuinness Boulevard/Humboldt Street and Vandervoort Avenue/Apollo Street intersections. The improvements in operations on the BQE and Meeker Avenue would have a significant cumulative effect on overall delay experienced by vehicles in this corridor.

To the extent that the Build Alternatives eliminate non-standard features and reduce congestion, it can be expected that accidents would be reduced. Alternatives RA-5 and RA-6, which retain the existing bridge, also retain the non-standard and non-conforming features of the existing bridge. This includes non-standard shoulders, sight distance, grade, and lane widths. The new parallel bridge built with each of these alternatives would address most of the non-standard features and, therefore, should contribute to a reduction in accidents. Alternatives BR-2, BR-3, and BR-5, each of which replaces the existing bridge with new bridges with fewer non-standard features, are expected to provide the greatest accident reduction.

The addition of auxiliary lanes in each Build Alternative would improve merging and weaving and should contribute to reducing rear-end and overtaking accidents near the ramps. Each of the Build Alternatives would add a second lane on the Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp to the BQE. This second lane, in combination with the increased length of the acceleration lane, is expected to reduce accidents at this location. Improvements to the flow of traffic and a reduction in levels of congestion would also contribute to lower accident rates.

Improved signal timing and geometric improvements along Meeker Avenue would help to relieve the congestion that is a principal cause of rear-end and overtaking accidents in the corridor. Improvements would also help to reduce right-angle accidents, which are generally caused by drivers running through red traffic signals.

H.2. Social Impacts

Social impacts encompass all those changes to a community that, while frequently not physical in nature, can change the character of the community. Projects that change the makeup of the community, whether it is changes in population (number of residents, income level, etc.), land use, or travel patterns, can have significant long term effects on the quality, character, and vitality of the community.

Because each of the Build Alternatives improves an existing highway with minimal increase in vehicle capacity, it is not expected to have any impact on development patterns in the area. Planned development in the area, particularly along the Greenpoint/Williamsburg waterfront, will occur with or without improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge. Many local plans call for improvements that are included in the project, such as improved stormwater handling, improved waterfront access, and rehabilitated and expanded parks.

In accordance with Executive Order 12898, the project was evaluated for its potential for disproportionate impacts on minority and low-income communities. While several environmental justice populations were identified in the Queens portion of the study area, impacts in these areas would be minimal in nature and not disproportionate.



Aside from impacts to Sergeant William Dougherty Playground, which are mitigated through the reconstruction of that park and creation of new nearby parkland, the project would not affect any community facilities (schools, churches, senior centers, etc.). With improvements to the pedestrian environment, each of the Build Alternatives would increase access to community facilities, including the playground, for residents who must cross under the BQE to access these facilities. One potential impact to emergency services was averted through coordination with the New York City Fire Department, which led to a modification to the design of the project to maintain Cherry Street beyond the Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp.

H.3. Economic Impacts

Each of the Build Alternatives would have both positive and negative effects on the local economy. Positive impacts include jobs generated both directly and indirectly from the construction project and the productivity benefits that come with reduced congestion on the BQE. Negative economic impacts would result from the relocation of businesses and jobs and loss of property tax revenue from property that would become state-owned right-of-way as a result of the project. The Build Alternatives would generate between 11,000 and 16,000 temporary jobs either directly or indirectly related to construction. Alternatives RA-6 and BR-5 would have the least impact on local businesses and employees. Alternative BR-5 is the only alternative that would require the relocation of residences (3). See Table ES-2 for more details.

H.4. Environmental Impacts

The very nature of the Kosciuszko Bridge, an elevated section of highway, spanning a navigable waterway in a dense urban environment with a long history of industrial use, creates the potential for significant impacts to the environment.

H.4.a. Water and Wildlife

The Kosciuszko Bridge spans the 90 m (300 ft) width of Newtown Creek approximately two miles east of where the creek enters the East River. Each of the Build Alternatives, which would construct one or more new structures across the creek, would take advantage of the project’s location on the creek, using it as the primary means for transporting materials and equipment to the project site during construction. While this would eliminate a significant number of truck trips that would otherwise occur on the local street network, it would have several effects on the creek. Existing water depths are sufficient for barges to reach the bridge without dredging. However, in order to dock the barges and off-load materials and equipment, temporary platforms would be required along the shoreline on both sides of the creek. Installation of these platforms would require the replacement of the existing bulkheads, which are in poor condition, and dredging of sediment to allow the barges adequate clearance to dock. The dredging would remove contaminated sediment present in the creek and, with the use of silt curtains and silt screens, would have minimal impact on water quality or fish living in the creek. Based on coordination with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), the bulkheads would be replaced with riprap (broken stone) which would create additional habitat for fish and wildlife.

A rehabilitation project in the 1960s disconnected the downspouts that drained stormwater from the majority of the bridge to the sewer that carried it to Newtown Creek. As a result, today, stormwater is collected in downspouts and free falls off the bridge onto the local streets below, flowing overland to the creek. Each of the Build Alternatives includes the construction of a new



stormwater handling system that would collect the water in a closed system, passing it through settling tanks designed to remove suspended solids and pollutants, before conveying it to Newtown Creek.

The Bridge Replacement Alternatives would remove the existing bridge and its Main Span piers, which are located partially in the creek, creating additional habitat and additional floodplain.

H.4.b. Historical and Cultural Resources

Human settlements have been present in the project area for centuries and its location near a water source increased the attractiveness of this area to native and non-native settlers. Based on research completed for the project a number of blocks have moderate or high potential for buried historic or prehistoric resources. Each of the Build Alternatives would affect several of these blocks. However, because the area is a highly developed, urban environment, and some of the potential resources may be buried under many feet of fill, the identification and evaluation of archaeological resources would be accomplished by monitoring the ground-disturbing activities associated with the construction phase of this project.

Two architectural resources that may be affected by the project were determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP): Old Calvary Cemetery and the Kosciuszko Bridge.

None of the Build Alternatives propose any ground-disturbing activities in Old Calvary Cemetery. The Rehabilitation Alternatives, which retain the existing bridge and construct a new bridge at a lower elevation adjacent to it, would have a visual impact on the Old Calvary Cemetery viewshed. However, details of design, use of materials, and colors of materials applied to the existing and new bridge, which will be determined during the final design phase of the project, would minimize visual impacts to the cemetery’s viewshed. These visual effects would not alter the character of the Old Calvary Cemetery’s setting, which has been previously compromised by urban development, resulting in no effect to the viewshed of this NRHP-eligible resource. The Bridge Replacement Alternatives would have a visual effect on the cemetery viewshed with the construction of a new, lower bridge, and removal of the steel sections. Similarly, details of design of the new bridge, determined during the final design phase of the project, would minimize the visual impacts to the cemetery’s viewshed and not alter the character of Old Calvary Cemetery’s setting.

Alternatives RA-5 and RA-6, which retain the existing bridge intact, albeit with rehabilitations, would have no impact on the Kosciuszko Bridge. Alternatives BR-2, BR-3, and BR-5, which remove the existing bridge entirely, would have an adverse effect on this resource.

H.4.c. Visual Resources

New bridge structures included in each of the Build Alternatives, either as a new parallel structure in the Rehabilitation Alternatives or as a new bridge replacing the existing structure in the Bridge Replacement Alternatives, would have a visual impact on at-grade and BQE motorists, residents, pedestrians (at-grade and BQE), bicyclists (at-grade and BQE), boaters, and retail, industrial and warehouse employees.

For the Rehabilitation Alternatives, the new parallel structure built at a lower elevation adjacent to the existing bridge would have both negative and positive impacts, depending upon the location of the viewer. Similarly, for the Bridge Replacement Alternatives, a new bridge



structure would have both positive and negative impacts, depending upon the location of the viewer. However, details of design, use of materials, and colors of materials applied to the existing and new bridge structures, which will be determined during the final design phase of the project, would minimize visual impacts.

H.4.d. Parks and Recreational Facilities

Each Build Alternative adds a second lane to the Vandervoort Avenue entrance ramp to the BQE and realigns Cherry Street to the south to maintain access to the industrial area, resulting in a negative impact on Sergeant William Dougherty Playground in Brooklyn. Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 requires that federally funded or approved transportation projects may not use land from a publicly owned park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or from a significant historic site, unless there is no feasible or prudent alternative to the use. Such use requires documentation that the proposed action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the protected properties. As part of the proposed mitigation for impacts to Sergeant William Dougherty Playground, each of the Build Alternatives would reconstruct the existing playground, which would increase the level of park functionality in the area, and create additional park area north of the BQE, resulting in a net increase in park area and making it more accessible to residents on that side of the BQE.

H.4.e. Air Quality

The project’s air quality analysis considered the potential for impacts at both the local (microscale) and area-wide (mesoscale) levels due to changes in traffic volumes and travel patterns. Impacts at the regional level are determined through the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council’s (NYMTC) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) analysis, which is completed every two years for the upcoming four year period. Because the Kosciuszko Bridge Project’s construction would not begin until 2011, the project will be included in the 2008-2012 TIP.

The microscale and mesoscale analyses considered the potential for impacts from increased emissions of carbon monoxide and particulate matter (PM). Because precursors to ozone, such as hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides, which are emitted by vehicles, must react chemically in order to form ozone, their effects are realized far downwind from their release points and their impacts must be analyzed on a regional basis by NYMTC through the TIP process. Two other pollutants that were historically emitted by vehicles, lead and sulfur dioxide, have, through controls on the contents of gasoline, been eliminated as concerns for highway-related projects.

The mesoscale analysis considered impacts that may result from changes in traffic volumes or travel patterns within the Secondary Traffic Study Area. The analysis considered impacts due to carbon monoxide and particulates in 2015, 2025, and 2035, with an impact defined as an increase in emissions of 2.0 percent or greater over the No Build Alternative. This analysis showed that no impact would result from the project in either 2015 or 2025. However, in 2035, emissions of carbon monoxide would be 2.03 percent higher than the No Build with Alternatives RA-5, BR-2, BR-3, and BR-5 and all Build Alternatives would increase emissions of particulates by 2.52 to 2.75 percent. While these impacts do not affect the project’s regional conformity status, they do constitute a project impact and cannot effectively be mitigated due to the large area over which the impacts occur.

The microscale analysis evaluates the potential for air quality impacts at specific intersections where idling and acceleration tend to increase the concentration of emissions. For carbon



monoxide, the six intersections considered to have the greatest likelihood of impact were selected for a screening analysis. While each intersection exceeds the LOS criterion, none exceed the volume threshold set by NYSDOT, indicating that there is no potential for impact and no further analysis is required. For particulate matter, while the project may result in a minimal increase in emissions of particulates (less than three percent), future levels are still expected to be well below the applicable standards.

H.4.f. Noise

The project evaluated the potential for the Build Alternatives to cause noise impacts to receptors (residences, parks, etc.). The existing environment near the project is generally noisy. In Brooklyn, it is not the BQE, but Meeker Avenue, that generates the majority of noise for adjacent receptors. In Queens, the BQE is the dominant source, but 43rd Street, Laurel Hill Boulevard, and the surrounding industrial uses contribute as well. In Brooklyn, existing noise levels for receptors along Meeker Avenue are as high as 75 decibels (dBA), with most above 70 dBA. In Queens, without an adjacent arterial, existing noise levels are lower; the highest levels are 68 dBA.

Noise modeling completed as part of the study predicts that without the project (i.e., with the No Build Alternative), changes to noise levels would range between no change (0 dBA) to an increase of 3 dBA. The change in sound levels with the Build Alternatives, relative to existing conditions, would range from a decrease of 1 dBA to an increase of 4 dBA.

FHWA has established Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) to set forth the noise level at which noise abatement measures must be considered. For all land uses potentially impacted by this project, the NAC is 67 dBA. Regulations require consideration of abatement when noise levels “approach or exceed” the appropriate NAC; FHWA has interpreted this as within 1 dBA (i.e., 66 dBA). An impact would also occur, and abatement must be considered, where the project would raise predicted future sound levels above existing levels by 6 dBA or more, even if the NAC are not exceeded.

None of the Build Alternatives resulted in an impact based on the substantial increase criterion. However, every alternative, including the No Build Alternative, would have impacts to receptors based on the NAC. Each of the Build Alternatives, except BR-5, would modestly increase the number of impacted dwelling units relative to the No Build Alternative. BR-5 would shift the BQE’s alignment to the south, away from the more densely populated residential areas in Brooklyn, thus reducing the number of impacted locations.

FHWA has established several acceptable abatement measures. However, most, such as shifting the highway away from receptors (in this case requiring substantial acquisition of private property) or acquiring vacant land so that new receptors cannot be located near the project, are not reasonable in an urban setting such as this. The only accepted method of abatement evaluated for this project was the construction of noise barriers. However, the noise model demonstrated that even very tall noise barriers installed on the BQE would not achieve a sound level reduction sufficient to consider them further. The maximum benefit at any residence was 4 dBA; NYSDOT requires a minimum reduction of 7 dBA for barriers to be considered.

There are, however, other measures that do not qualify as noise abatement measures that could be incorporated into the Build Alternatives to reduce the annoyance associated with elevated sound levels, and help create a more comfortable auditory environment. By replacing the deck of the BQE throughout the project limits, each Build Alternative would eliminate the



existing uneven joints that cause noise when heavy vehicles pass over them. Each of the Build Alternatives would also include a range of streetscaping improvements, including the placement of trees between the sidewalk and local street. While such sparse vegetation does not noticeably shield the receiver from noise, it can reduce the perception of noise and result in a more comfortable environment. Finally, the use of sound-absorptive paneling in areas where the BQE has solid enclosure walls (e.g., existing brick enclosure walls on the Brooklyn Connector) will be evaluated during final design as a means of marginally reducing noise from Meeker Avenue traffic that reflects back towards residences.

H.4.g. Contaminated Materials

Located in an area with a long history of industrial uses, contamination is common in the soil within the project area. Of particular concern during the investigation was the underground oil plume in Brooklyn associated with the former Exxon-Mobil processing facility. Other sites of concern include the former Phelps Dodge site in Queens, current and historic gasoline stations and storage facilities, and historic manufacturing facilities. Contaminated materials evaluated in this investigation included soil, soil gas, groundwater, Newtown Creek sediment, and building materials associated with the existing roadway, bridge, and underground utilities.

A historic map review, environmental database search, and site reconnaissance identified 33 sites in the immediate project area that may be contaminated. Based on this information, samples were taken from soil at 21 locations (35 total samples), from groundwater at five existing monitoring wells, and from soil gas at seven locations (12 total samples).

Various metals (including arsenic, lead, and mercury) and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) were detected in the majority of soil samples collected from the study area at concentrations above their respective regulatory reference values. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in soils above reference values at only two soil boring locations. No Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) were detected above reference values in any of the soil samples collected.

Groundwater samples were collected for analysis from five ExxonMobil groundwater monitoring wells and from two of the soil borings. VOCs were detected in two wells at concentrations that exceed their respective New York City Department of Environmental Protection Sewer Discharge Limitations. The SVOC naphthalene was also detected above sewer discharge limits in the groundwater sample from one well. No additional contaminants were detected above sewer discharge limits in any of the groundwater samples collected from the project site. The majority of groundwater samples contained various VOCs above their respective NYSDEC Class GA Groundwater values. Four groundwater samples contained various metals above Class GA values, including cadmium, lead, arsenic, selenium, chromium, and lead. Measurable free-phase petroleum product was observed in wells ranging from a sheen to a thickness of 0.35m (1’-2”). The limits of the free-phase petroleum plume appear to extend beneath the BQE in the vicinity of Van Dam and Varick Streets. As a result, excavation dewatering fluids generated during construction in some areas of the project would likely require treatment prior to discharge to a sanitary sewer or Newtown Creek.

One of the soil gas samples, located at the intersection of Van Dam Street and Meeker Avenue, exceeded standards for total VOCs and for benzene individually. Total VOCs for this location exceeded the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) standard. BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) compounds, which make up a portion of the total VOC



concentration and are of greater concern, were found to be minimally above the NYSDOH standard.

Sediment samples taken as part of the investigation of the Phelps Dodge site, as well as studies conducted by NYSDEC in the vicinity of the bridge, found the sediment to contain various contaminants at potential hazardous waste levels, including arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, silver, zinc, PCBs, and various Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs). Material dredged from the creek for construction of the temporary barge docking areas likely contains elevated levels of similar contaminants.

Deep operations along the BQE in the vicinity of Varick Street and Van Dam Street in Brooklyn could encounter the free-phase petroleum plume that exists on the groundwater table in this area at depths ranging from approximately 12 to 15 m (40 to 50 ft) below grade. If engineering considerations call for deep placement of structure support columns in this area, the columns could penetrate the petroleum layer. A review of available geologic cross sections for this area do not reveal the presence of a distinct hydrologic confining layer, suggesting that placement of columns that impact the product layer would not cause cross contamination of a lower hydrologic unit.

Similar to other major construction projects in an urban area, the Kosciuszko Bridge Project would exercise care during construction to control the risks that could be associated with the mobilization of contaminants in soil, groundwater, building materials, or equipment. Prior to construction, a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) and a Community Air Monitoring Plan (CAMP) would be developed to limit the potential for worker and public contact with contamination found in either the soil or groundwater. Dust controls, such as misting, would be employed as appropriate during excavation activity to prevent airborne migration of potentially contaminated material. Contaminated material encountered during excavation activity would be handled, transported, and disposed of according to all applicable federal, state, and local rules and regulations, and in accordance with the HASP and soil and groundwater management plans.

H.4.h. Construction Impacts

Construction impacts for technical resource areas (e.g., hazardous materials, air quality, noise) of greatest interest are anticipated to be minor and temporary in nature, primarily due to the length of time of construction required of different activities. Construction activities would require work in locations for a limited amount of time (under a two year time period in any location). Impacts in specific areas are discussed within the technical resource chapters.

H.4.i. Permits

Construction of any of the Build Alternatives would require NYSDOT to obtain a number of permits from various federal, state, and local agencies. Permits would be required from the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, NYSDEC, New York City Department of Transportation, and New York City Department of City Planning due to the following activities:

Construction of a new bridge across a navigable waterway;

Dredging and other construction activities in Newtown Creek;



Handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous and non-hazardous soil, water, and dredged material encountered during construction;

Release of stormwater (after pre-treatment) to Newtown Creek;

Short-term closure of highway lanes and local streets during construction; and

Maintaining the existing connection of the stormwater system at the western end of the project to the New York City sanitary sewer system.

H.4.j. Indirect/Secondary and Cumulative Effects

In transportation projects, indirect impacts occur most frequently when a road or transit service is expanded or built, providing improved access to an area that subsequently experiences a change in use or intensity of use. While each of the Build Alternatives would improve traffic operations in the area, due to constraints such as existing dense development and limited capacity on abutting highway segments, the project is not expected to have an effect on population or development patterns in the area.

Cumulative impacts may not be detectible or significant when considered for a single project, but when added to impacts of other actions can lead to a measurable impact. Based on a review of projects proposed and planned for the project’s study area, three areas for potential cumulative impact were identified: traffic, air quality, and economics. The project’s traffic study, discussed earlier, considered the additional trips associated with these projects into its analysis and, therefore, captured any cumulative traffic impacts. Similarly, the project’s air quality study was based on data provided by the project’s traffic study and, therefore, incorporated any cumulative effects into its analysis. Finally, each of the Build Alternatives would generate significant positive economic impacts (11,000 to 16,000 jobs) during the construction period. Although estimates were not made of the employment benefits of these other projects, they would only enhance the employment opportunities created by the Kosciuszko Bridge Project.

H.5. Comparison of Alternatives

Table ES-2 summarizes the positive and negative impacts of each alternative described in the preceding sections.

TABLE ES-2: COMPARISON OF MAJOR ELEMENTS OF ALTERNATIVES

No Build

Alternative Alternative RA-5 Alternative RA-6 Alternative BR-2 Alternative BR-3 Alternative BR-5

Operations/Safety

Lane Configuration 3 Eastbound

3 Westbound

5 Eastbound

4 Westbound

4 Eastbound

5 Westbound

5 Eastbound

4 Westbound

5 Eastbound

4 Westbound

5 Eastbound

4 Westbound

Separation of Eastbound Traffic No Yes No Yes Yes Yes

Eastbound Entrance Ramp 1 lane 2 lanes 2 lanes 2 lanes 2 lanes 2 lanes

Shoulders 0.30 m to 1.52 m (1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-standard)

Existing Bridge/ Brooklyn

Connector: 0.30 m to 1.52 m

(1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-standard)

New Main Span and Approaches: 3.05 m (10’-0”)

right, 1.22 m (4’-0”) left (standard)

Existing Bridge/ Brooklyn

Connector: 0.30 m to 1.52 m

(1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-standard)


right, 1.22 m (4’-0”) left (standard)

Brooklyn Connector: 0.30 m

to 1.52 m (1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-

standard)


right 1.22 m (4’-0”) left (standard)


to 1.52 m (1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-

standard)




to 1.52 m (1’-0” to 5’-0”) (non-

standard)



Main Span Lane Widths 3.30 m (10’-10”) (non-standard)

Existing Bridge: 3.30 m (10’-10”) (non-standard)

New Bridge: 3.66 m (12’-0”) (standard)

Existing Bridge: 3.30 m (10’-10”) (non-standard)

New Bridge: 3.66 m (12’-0”) (standard)

3.66 m (12’-0”) (standard)

3.66 m (12’-0”) (standard)

3.66 m (12’-0”) (standard)

Grades Up to 4% (non-standard)

Existing Bridge: up to 4% (non-standard)

New Bridge: 2% (standard)1

Existing Bridge: up to 4% (non-standard)

New Bridge: 2% (standard)1

2% (standard)1 2% (standard)1 2% (standard)1

Level of Service (2045) Varies: C to F Varies: B to F Varies: C to F Varies: B to F Varies: B to F Varies: B to F

Draft Environm

ental Impact Statem

ent

Executive Summ

ary

Kosciuszko B

ridge Project ES-19

March 2007

No Build


Average Speed (2045)

A.M. Peak Hour

Eastbound

Westbound

P.M. Peak Hour

Eastbound

Westbound

km/h

18.9

27.6

11.3

11.4

mph

11.7

17.1

7.0

7.1

km/h

62.5

40.9

66.9

39.6

mph

38.9

25.4

41.6

24.6

km/h

34.7

52.2

47.5

49.9

mph

21.6

32.4

29.5

31.0

km/h

67.5

46.9

72.4

47.2

mph

41.9

29.2

45.0

29.3

km/h

67.5

46.9

72.4

47.2

mph

41.9

29.2

45.0

29.3

km/h

67.5

46.9

72.4

47.2

mph

41.9

29.2

45.0

29.3

Vehicle Hours of Delay (2045)

A.M. Peak Hour

P.M. Peak Hour

705 hours

816 hours

314 hours

285 hours

387 hours

328 hours

235 hours

206 hours

235 hours

206 hours

235 hours

206 hours

Construction/Maintenance

Construction Duration N/A 3 years, 9 months 3 years, 9 months 6 years 5 years 5 years

Project Cost $0 $559 million $515 million $712 million $692 million $630 million

Estimated Time Before Major Repairs Required

6 years 25 years 25 years 75 years 75 years 75 years

Maintenance Cost over 50-year Lifespan

$300 million $60 million $60 million $20 million $20 million $20 million

Economic

Construction-Related Employment

0 12,549 11,562 15,984 15,535 14,143

Annual Property Tax Revenue Loss due to Right-of-Way Acquisition

0 $486,086 $469,876 $667,808 $665,994 $550,778

Businesses Relocated 0 28 15 30 30 26

Residences Relocated 0 0 0 0 0 3

Draft Environm

ental Impact Statem

ent

Executive Summ

ary

Kosciuszko B

ridge Project ES-20

March 2007

No Build


Environmental

Parkland

Permanent Use Net Increase after

Mitigation

Existing: 3,056 m2

(0.76 acres)

601 m2 (0.15 acres)

13,351 m2 (3.30 acres)

297 m2 (0.07 acres)

11,040 m2 (2.73 acres)

445 m2 (0.11 acres)

13,383 m2 (3.31 acres)

445 m2 (0.11 acres)

13,247 m2 (3.27 acres)

1,299 m2 (0.32 acres)

13,715 m2 (3.39 acres)

Streetscaping Improvements

No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Bikeway/Walkway No Yes No Yes Yes Yes

Boat Launches 0 2 2 2 2 2

Increased/Improved Water Habitat

None Moderate Moderate Substantial Substantial Substantial

Noise Receptors Impacted 456 462 474 462 462 444

Air Quality Impacts None Microscale: None

Mesoscale: 2.75% increase in PM2.5

emissions

Microscale: None


emissions

Microscale: None


emissions

Microscale: None


emissions

Microscale: None


emissions

Impact on Contaminated Materials

Soil

Groundwater

Brooklyn oil plume

Creek Sediment

None

None

None

None

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Moderate

High

Low

High

High

High

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

High

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Impact to Historic Properties

Kosciuszko Bridge

Old Calvary Cemetery

None

None

None

Visual (mixed)

None

Visual (mixed)

Removed

Visual (mixed)

Removed

Visual (mixed)

Removed

Visual (mixed)

Note: (1) A small section (less than 200m [660ft]) of the Brooklyn Connector would retain non-standard grades.

Draft Environm

ental Impact Statem

ent

Executive Summ

ary

Kosciuszko B

ridge Project ES-21

March 2007



I. FUTURE ACTIONS

With the release of this DEIS, all interested parties are encouraged to review and comment on the material contained in the document. Comments may be submitted by mail, email, phone, or fax or at one of the two scheduled public hearings:

Thursday, April 19, 2007 Thursday, April 26, 2007 Polish National Home DeVry Institute of Technology 261 Driggs Avenue 30-20 Thomson Avenue Greenpoint, Brooklyn Long Island City, Queens 11:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. 11:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. (Open House begins at 10:00 a.m.) (Open House begins at 10:00 a.m.)

Additional information about the public hearings, as well as the complete DEIS and appendices, is available at NYSDOT’s website:

www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/regional-offices/region11/projects/kosciuszko-bridge-project.

The DEIS is also available at a number of publicly-accessible project repositories. For a list of locations, please refer to Table ES-1 or the project website. For additional public hearing information or to submit comments on the DEIS, please note the following contact information:

Mr. Robert Adams, P.E. Project Manager New York State Department of Transportation Hunters Point Plaza 47-40 21st Street, Room 510 Long Island City, NY 11101 Phone: (718) 482-4683 Fax: (718) 482-6319 Email: [email protected]

Following review of all comments received by May 25, 2007, NYSDOT will publish an FEIS, summarizing and responding to comments received and selecting a preferred alternative for implementation. Upon concurrence with the preferred alternative, FHWA will issue a ROD documenting this decision and allowing NYSDOT to proceed with final design and construction. With the ROD expected in 2007 and final design estimated to take three years for any of the Build Alternatives, construction is estimated to begin in 2011.

NYSDOT has committed to continuing their aggressive outreach program, via the SAC and other outreach and information activities, throughout final design and construction. Involvement of stakeholders and constituencies during these phases is essential to ensure that they are fully engaged and informed, as details that will directly affect them during construction are finalized.

executive summary...queens borough public library – sunnyside branch anne bagnall, community...

Documents