Skip to main content

Sunny Pacific Park? Remember, towers will cause extensive shadows (& state analysis was vague)

From New York Times; Pacific Park shadows not delinated
It was interesting to read last week's New York Times Upshot feature, Mapping the Shadows of New York City: Every Building, Every Block, which promised more than it delivered--yet still left some sobering observations.

The interactive map is based on slightly stale data. So "every building" does not include recently erected Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park towers or their shadows, much less the shadows long predicted on buildout. Rather, the project footprint comes off as a smudge, as shown in the screenshot at right.

But the article did send me back a decade to recall the estimates of the significant shadows that project buildings are predicted to cast.

Not only will those shadows darken the much-hyped "park," they will extend past the footprint. Remember, the architect of the ten-story Atlantic Terrace building just northeast of the arena block scrapped plans for solar panels, saying in 2007, "It’s just not an option for a building that will be in substantial shade all year round."

The 2006 visuals

Take for example the image at left of the project's Phase 2, east of Carlton Avenue, produced in 2006 for the Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods (CBN), a coalition set up to respond to the environmental review.

CBN noted that, while state document portrayed the planned open space as green and unsullied by shadows, a shadow analysis suggested that in March, there wouldn't be much sun. (That also applies to September, six months later.) December is far worse, June much better.

And, as I'll describe further below, the language in the November 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) regarding shadows is vague and hedging, leaving it impossible to know just how much space would out of shadow and for how long.

However, Chapter 9 of the Final EIS, on Shadows, offers a seemingly un-rebuttable defense of shadows:
Were it not for the development of these buildings, this publicly accessible space would not be created. Therefore, the shadows on this public space would not be considered significant adverse impacts.
Promotional image, shadowless, from project web site
In other words, don't complain.

On the other hand, shouldn't the developers touting "Pacific Park" maybe acknowledge the shadows? Oh, no. That would hurt sales.

But maybe those who rhapsodized about the Atlantic Yards open space--remember the Rev. Herbert Daughtry's expansive invocation at the March 2010 groundbreaking, citing "blooming flowers, and decorative fountains of spouting water"--might have second thoughts.

The warning in the Times

A key passage in the Times article should serve as a warning:
But [architect and consultant] Mr. [Michael] Kwartler doesn't think the solution needs to be so binary. Sunlight can be saved if developers and planners grow more sensitive to how buildings are oriented. The biggest enemy of parks, and especially small parks near new development in Brooklyn, says Mr. Kwartler, is bulky buildings to the south end of parks. He says that much of the loss of sunlight in our public parks could be avoided if our tall, bulky buildings were simply positioned to the north, west or east side.
(Emphases added throughout)

Well, there will be four tall, bulky buildings along the southeast block of Pacific Park Brooklyn, furthering shadows on the public space--not a park--that's been so highly touted.

The bookend buildings on the southeast block, B11 (550 Vanderbilt) and B14 (535 Carlton) are under construction

Looking at the shadow studies

Chapter 9 of the 2006 FEIS explains, in part, how the open space is calculated to avoid shadows. But the winter is pretty much a disaster--as the state study showed, that long shadows at 9 am in the cold month of December not only cover the open space, but also large portions of Fort Greene.

The actual impact, according to the state, is not very clear:
The proposed project’s publicly accessible open space is designed to take into account the location and heights of the proposed buildings and the shadows they would create. Major landscape elements, such as the oval lawn, primary pathways, and water features, would be located to receive the maximum exposure to midday sun throughout the year. The location of other landscape elements, such as the north-south pathways and smaller passive use areas, would be sited and oriented to receive sunlight when other areas of this open space are in shade so that sizable portions of the entire open space would have access to sunlight during the late morning through early afternoon hours. The proposed project’s publicly accessible open space would receive shadow from Buildings 3 through 15 throughout the day in each analysis period. The incremental shadow would be greatest in the early mornings, when the shadows would stretch east and late afternoons, when the shadows would stretch west along the open space. During those times, most of the open space would be in shadow. Shadow is not generally expected to adversely affect active recreational uses such as volleyball, bocce, and the half basketball courts. The shadow would diminish the attractiveness of the passive recreation areas to their potential users. 
Ok, but what are "sizable portions"? Is that 20%, or 40%, or 70%?

And couldn't "late morning through early afternoon" be a rather brief period? Both of those descriptions have some flex in them, and could mean rather limited amounts.

The state's shadow study, issued in the July 2006 Draft EIS and then the November 2006 Final EIS, followed up on a study done by Pratt Institute Professor Brent Porter and his students, published in the 6/26/06 Brooklyn Paper, warning of severe winter shadows extending throughout Fort Greene.

The state analysis, as shown in the various shadow diagrams below, does not assess Fort Greene to the same extent.

And, of course, there are many more towers along/near Flatbush Avenue today, casting additional shadows. But it is clear, even from the state analysis, that the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park open space will not be a sunny meadow.

Shifting shadows

The chapter offers this assessment on impacts, explaining that, the sun casts longer shadows in the early morning, and that winter sun, which is lower in the sky, casts longer shadows. And while summer shadows are the shortest, the sun travels farther, so summer sun "casts shadows in more directions than those seen in other seasons, and its late sunset and early sunrise creates shadows earlier in the morning and later in the evening than in other seasons."

[Note: the images below are blended from the Draft EIS and Final EIS in part because not all the images from the latter are available online. Not all the images from the Draft EIS were available either, so I later copied some images from a disc.]

The shadows in March and September

MARCH 21/SEPTEMBER 21—ANALYSIS PERIOD: 7:36 AM TO 4:29 PM EST
At the beginning of the analysis period, almost all of the proposed project’s open space would be in shadow cast from Buildings 5 through 15 (see Figure 9-44). Throughout the day, these buildings would cast shadow on the new, adjacent open spaces. However, from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM, large portions of the open spaces would be in full sun (see Figures 9-45 through 9-47). These open spaces would be covered in shadow again at the end of the analysis period (see Figure 9-48).
As far as I can tell, large portions would not be in full sun, either.










The shadows in May and August

MAY 6/AUGUST 6—ANALYSIS PERIOD: 7:27 AM TO 6:18 PM DST
At the beginning of the analysis period, almost all of the project-created publicly accessible open space would be in shadow cast by Buildings 5 through 15 (see Figure 9-49). Throughout the day, these buildings would cast shadow on the new, adjacent open spaces. However, from 10:00 AM to 4:45 PM, large portions of the open spaces would be in full sun (see Figures 9-50 through 9-52). At the end of the analysis period, the open spaces would be covered in shadow again (see Figure 9-53).
Well, during that time, large portions would not be in full sun, either.










The shadows in June

JUNE 21—ANALYSIS PERIOD: 6:57 AM TO 7:01 PM DST
Buildings 5 through 14 would cast almost all of the project-created publicly accessible open space in shadow at the beginning of the analysis period (see Figure 9-54). The adjacent open space would receive shadow throughout the day from these buildings. However, from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM large portions of the open space would be in full sun (see Figures 9-55 through 9-57). When the analysis period ends the open spaces would be covered in shadow again (see Figure 9-58).
Well, large portions would not be in full sun, either. And it looks pretty shady by 4:15 pm, actually.






The shadows in December

DECEMBER 21—ANALYSIS PERIOD: 8:51 AM TO 2:53 PM EST
Early in the analysis period, almost all of the project-created publicly accessible open space would be in shadow cast mainly by Buildings 5 through 14 (see Figures 9-59 and 9-60). Throughout the day, these buildings would cast shadow on the adjacent, new open spaces, but there would be some areas of sun in the midday (see Figures 9-61 through 9-62). At the end of the analysis period, these open spaces would again be covered in shadow (see Figure 9-63).
Yes, there would be "some areas of sun." Sure. Just not very many.







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…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

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…