Skip to main content

From the Response to Comments: modular construction, jobs, extended hours will be analyzed--but only for Phase 2

I've been going through the Response to Comments document produced by Empire State Development to accompany the release last month of the Final Scope for a Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement. (The SEIS is coming in the spring.)

There were a lot of questions and concerns about modular construction, since it was not studied in the original environmental review and is being used for the project, including Phase 1, which is not part of the SEIS.

The first set of comments drew the response that only the impact of modular construction in Phase 2 will be studied.

The comments:
Comment 71: The use of modular construction was not detailed or assessed in the 2006 FEIS or the 2009 and 2010 Technical Memorandums. FCRC has already disclosed numerous changes to the construction plan including situating a factory off-site, and delivering large modular units through the course of the early morning and work day for installation on site. Both the height and number of buildings proposed to be constructed at Atlantic Yards using modular techniques is unprecedented in the United States. Although the court order for the SEIS specifies an analysis of Phase II construction, in July of 2011, the court would have had no way of knowing a decision to use modular construction techniques for the Atlantic Yards project would later be made. Therefore, a thorough study of the impact of the developer's decision to use modular techniques must be included in the SEIS. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The construction method now differs from what has been analyzed. There’s no meaningful construction plan detail for modular construction, even though it may have very different implications for side walk and street corner and travel lane access. (Krashes)
The response:
Response: The use of modular techniques to construct the Phase II project buildings would not alter the requirement that the buildings comply with the Design Guidelines and the New York City Building Code. As described in the Draft and Final Scope of Work, the construction analysis for Phase II of the Project will, where relevant, discuss differences in potential impacts related to on-site standard and modular construction techniques.
Potential extended hours

Potential extended hours will be studied, but, again, only involving Phase 2. (There are already overnight deliveries of modules for Phase 1.)

The comments:
Comment 72: The extended hours of construction: The construction occurred virtually 24/7. So a lot of the premises upon which the FEIS did the study in fact were not effectuated. And we need to look at better studying those, making sure that construction does not happen 24/7, reducing the number of hours and the type of construction that happens at various times of day. (Simon)
Given the significant impact that extended construction can have on the quality of life of neighborhood residents, the SEIS should identify and assess measures to reduce, monitor and mitigate extended hours of construction. It is critical that the SEIS revise the MEC to provide stricter requirements, including: reducing the incidence of extended hours, particularly the scheduling of construction for 24 hours per day; limiting the number of consecutive days when extended construction hours, particularly 24-hour construction work, is permissible; and requiring that construction periods with extended hours, particularly activities carried out 24/7, be followed by at least 7 days of normal construction hours. (George)
Of greatest importance, the SEIS should seek and obtain more stringent commitments regarding extended hours work, including:
 Reducing the incidence of extended hours, particularly the scheduling of construction for 24 hours per day
 Limiting the number of consecutive days when extended construction hours, particularly 24-hour construction work, is permissible.
 Requiring that construction periods with extended hours, particularly activities carried out 24/7, be followed by at least 7 days of normal construction hours. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: The SEIS will discuss the anticipated hours of work during construction. To the extent that certain construction activities may result in extended work hours beyond 6:00 PM, the SEIS will describe the purpose and anticipated duration of such activities. If construction of Phase II under the Extended Build-Out Scenario results in any significant adverse impacts not disclosed in the FEIS, the SEIS will seek to identify practicable mitigation measures to address those impacts.
The impact on sidewalks

The comment:
Comment 73: The use of the modular construction method, as well as the phasing of property control have increased the likelihood that construction staging will be located on sidewalks instead of inside property lines as originally planned. The SEIS must study pedestrian facilities taking into account changes to the construction schedule and construction method in terms of pedestrian LOS [levels of service], neighborhood character, economic development and visual resources. (George)
The response:
Response: The SEIS construction analysis for Phase II will, where relevant, discuss differences in potential impacts related to on-site standard and modular construction techniques. The construction analysis will also assess the environmental impacts of any anticipated staging on sidewalks associated either with the use of modular construction or with any anticipated changes to the construction sequence since preparation of the FEIS. Consistent with the FEIS, the SEIS assessment of pedestrian conditions resulting from construction will be qualitative and will not include a quantitative LOS analysis.
How many jobs?

Modular construction involves lower-paying factory jobs and, likely, fewer overall jobs. Again, there will be a limited analysis, of economic benefits (rather than a cost-benefit analysis) limited to Phase 2.

The comments:
Comment 78: Job creation was a major public incentive leading to the approval of the Atlantic Yards project. It has been reported that a large percentage of construction tasks will be transferred to the module factories, and that workers in the module factories will earn less than counterparts working on site. The SEIS must study how the decision to use modular construction techniques will affect the number of jobs created by the project and the pay scale of those jobs, and the impact of any change on the local economy. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The ESD should study and publish the economic consequences of the commitment to union construction jobs in standard building techniques versus modular. (Vogel)
The response:
Response: As indicated in Draft Scope of Work, the SEIS will discuss the Phase II construction period’s economic benefits, as well as any potential changes in construction benefits due to the potential incorporation of modular construction techniques.
Impacts from the factory?

Again, the analysis of delivery impacts is limited to Phase 2.

The comment:
Comment 90: The SEIS must study whether any new construction impacts have been created by locating a module factory in the Brooklyn Navy Yard. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: The construction analysis in the SEIS will, where relevant, discuss differences in potential impacts related to modular construction techniques on some or potentially all of the Phase II buildings. This analysis will account for the potential use of the existing module factory in the Brooklyn Navy Yard as the origin of modules delivered to the Phase II site, but the environmental impacts of the existing factory at the Brooklyn Navy Yard are outside the scope of the SEIS.
Unanticipated impacts from deliveries

The comment:
Comment 100: Arena construction showed that even with the best-laid plans, coordinating construction deliveries so that they occur as planned and without unanticipated impacts is difficult. The oversized loads transporting modules from the factory in the Brooklyn Navy Yard to the Atlantic Yards site clearly have the potential to be disruptive to traffic along the entire route. The SEIS' transportation analysis must detail the route and timing of these deliveries, plans for staging and dispatching them, and control procedures for overseeing that the plans are followed, together with the expected impacts of module deliveries on the local transportation network.
The SEIS must also study the potential for the use of modular construction to increase the demand for sidewalk and travel lane closures, and/or the implementation of temporary sidewalks. (Brooklyn Speaks)
The response:
Response: The SEIS will include a qualitative discussion of the potential use of modular construction including the potential impacts due to temporary sidewalk and travel lane closures. The SEIS will discuss the anticipated delivery truck routing and timing of modular deliveries as well as the plans for staging and dispatching these deliveries.

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.