Skip to main content

Despite concerns, state won't study impact of post-event pedestrian surges; also unlikely is look at impact of roof revamp

If Forest City Ratner's new Chinese partner, the Greenland Group, will help revamp the Barclays Center roof, what might be the impacts? That question is among those expected to be brought up at the meeting tonight of Atlantic Yards Quality of Life Committee (6:30, Brooklyn Hospital).

But I don't expect it to be examined formally by Empire State Development (ESD), the state agency overseeing/shepherding Atlantic Yards, because it's not part of the court-ordered Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)--and it was, understandably, not part of any previous review.

 (That doesn't mean there won't be some memo to the "Atlantic Yards file" that declares roof construction workable.)

Post-event surges

Other elements of Barclays Center operations also fall through the cracks. After more than a year of operations at the arena, it's clear that post-event surges of patrons leaving stress the sidewalks and subway entrance(s) more than pre-game conditions, because attendees tend to arrive over a long period of time.

But ESD won't study post-game conditions, as noted in the Response to Comments document (below), posted along with the Final Scope for an SEIS. (The Draft SEIS will come in the spring.)

Two comments addressed post-event conditions, combining the impact of arena events with the new construction:
Comment 48: An updated pedestrian analysis in the SEIS should study post-event conditions in the project site. (Brooklyn Speaks)
We’ve got a lot of new information about Phase I. We know that the sidewalks have been overstressed. We know that the post event analysis, the post event games after an arena event is by far the worst time for pedestrians. There are surges. (Krashes)
The response was again to focus on pre-game periods, when commuters and event-goers combine:
Response: The pedestrian analyses in the SEIS will focus on the weekday AM and PM commuter peak periods and the Saturday midday, as these are expected to be the peak periods for Phase II residential and retail travel demand. The weekday 7-8 PM pre-game is included to assess the potential effects of Phase II residential commuter demand during a period of peak arena activity. Post-event conditions are not included in the pedestrian analyses as these would not typically be peak times for travel demand from Phase II development.
Another addressed the arena block:
Comment 44: The SEIS should detail the changes to the arena and arena block layout and assess them for the new conditions they create, particularly post-event. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: The 2035 Future Without Phase II transportation analyses in the SEIS will reflect conditions on the arena block based on current plans. The transportation analyses will focus on the peak periods for demand from the residential and retail uses that would be developed under Phase II. The post-event periods are not considered peak periods for these Phase II residential and retail uses and will therefore not be included in the analyses.
Impacts of construction

Another comment addressed construction:
Comment 97: The TDM did not take into account the dangerous situations caused by 15 years more of pedestrian walkways being moved onto streets, along with the narrowing of sidewalks. This is of particular concern nearest the arena where, especially in an emergency or at the end of a popular concert with younger clients, sidewalk capacity needs to be maximized, not minimized. All pedestrian safety issues during the extended Phase II construction are further compromised by the current issue of arena event attendees and their hired cars (buses, limos, black cars, etc.) parking illegally in areas immediately around the arena, a problem that the arena operators, in the aggregate, have been unable to eliminate as of March, 2013. (Ettlinger)
The response:
Response: The SEIS will address the capacity and safety needs of pedestrians during the Phase II construction period. The SEIS will discuss the use of sidewalk bridges and temporary walkways to provide pedestrian flow around the construction site. See also the response to Comment 129 [which addresses compliance].
This doesn't necessarily address the arena block.

Less sidewalk space

The comment:
Comment 99: In 2009, the construction of the arena and non-arena buildings were delinked. As a result, the amount of available sidewalk and street corner space on the arena block will be significantly reduced for twelve years longer, depending upon the construction period of B1. (Krashes)
The response:
Response: The SEIS will study the potential effects of extended Phase II construction activities. The SEIS will assume that Buildings 2, 3, and 4 will be complete prior to the start of construction of Phase II. In the analysis of construction impacts of Phase II of the Project, the SEIS will also take into account the potential for some overlap in the construction of certain Phase I and Phase II buildings. The SEIS will assume that Building 1 and Site 5 will be constructed at some point during the construction of Phase II, and will be considered part of the No Build Condition.
This allows for examination of the impact of construction of, say, Building 1, the tower slated to rise over the arena plaza. But it doesn't acknowledge the roof.

Pedestrian corridors

Several commenters raised questions about pedestrian corridors, which will, according to the state, be studied:
Comment 102: The SEIS should detail and assess how arena patrons are going to be managed through the construction of each building in Phases I and II. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: As described on page 2 of the Draft Scope of Work, the Draft SEIS is being prepared pursuant to the Order of the Supreme Court for New York County to examine the potential environmental impacts of the completion of Phase II of the Project in 2035. The SEIS’s construction analysis will identify the anticipated roadway and sidewalk disruptions at the project site and describe the anticipated route protection for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians during different phases of the Phase II construction under the Extended Build-Out Scenario. It will also assess how on-going construction activities during Phase II construction may affect pedestrians (including event patrons) walking in the areas adjoining the Phase II construction.
Another comment addressed pedestrian corridors:
Comment 104: Project documents identify the east-west and north-south corridors as significant features in the project's open space plan. In addition to providing pedestrian infrastructure, these corridors serve as connections between neighborhoods and, for that reason, were specifically identified by the FEIS as blight mitigations. The SEIS should examine the delay in the completion of these corridors, including:
 Whether delay in providing neighborhood connections continues existing blight;
 Whether delay would reroute pedestrians on to other streets;
 The utility of partial construction of the corridor, which might be a dead-end walkway; and
 The impact of the loss of pedestrian traffic to neighborhood businesses. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: The SEIS will evaluate whether any of the potential construction scenarios will create a change to the pedestrian experience that is sufficiently significant to require greater explanation and further study. If warranted, an analysis of urban design and visual resources will be prepared. The SEIS will also include a qualitative assessment of pedestrian trips generated by the projected construction workers and discuss how on-going construction activities during Phase II construction may affect pedestrians (including event patrons) walking in the areas adjoining the Phase II construction. In addition, the SEIS will include a neighborhood character assessment that will consider whether a prolonged construction schedule for Phase II would create conditions that would lead to substantial residential or business disinvestment in the areas surrounding the project site. It should be noted, however, that the pedestrian connections are Project benefits, and extending the time for providing those benefits would not be a significant impact of the Project. No changes have been proposed to the pedestrian connections in the Project open space as set forth in the Design Guidelines.
Atlantic Yards, Response to Comments on Draft Scope for Supplementary EIS, Feb. 7, 2014 by AYReport

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…

Former ESDC CEO Lago returns to NYC to head City Planning Commission

Carl Weisbrod, Mayor Bill de Blasio's City Planning Commission Chairman and Director of the Department of City Planning, is resigning,

And he's being replaced by Marisa Lago, currently a federal official, but who Atlantic Yards-ologists remember as the short-term Empire State Development Corporation CEO who, in an impolitic but candid 2009 statement, acknowledged that the project would take "decades."

Still, Lago not long after that played the good soldier at a May 2009 Senate oversight hearing, justifying changes in the project but claiming the public benefits remained the same.

By returning to City Planning, Lago will join former ESDC General Counsel Anita Laremont, who after retiring from the state (and taking a pension) got the job with the city.

Back at planning

Lago, a lawyer, in 1983 began work as an aide to City Planning Chairman Herb Sturz, and later served as the General Counsel to the president of the NYC Economic Development Corporation, Weisbrod himself.