10.0 URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES
10.1 Introduction
Consideration of Project aesthetics is part of the environmental review process under Article X, which requires the Siting Board to issue a Certificate only if it finds that the Project "minimizes adverse environmental impacts, considering... the interest of the state with respect to aesthetics." PSL168.2(c)(i). The Siting Board regulations explicitly require an analysis of visual resources. 16 NYCRR 1001.3(b)1(iii). NYSDEC also issued a policy memorandum in July 2000 entitled Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts. The Project's impact on urban design will also be considered. It is TGE's intent that, after affording an opportunity for input form agencies and stakeholders, that it propose the design of the Project as to incorporate stakeholders and agency input that will enhance the urban design of the surrounding area and is compatible with the safe operations of the Project.
10.2 Existing Urban Setting
The Application will describe the existing urban and aesthetic context for the Project. A preliminary introduction is provided here. The Project site is situated on the East River waterfront in Brooklyn. From Manhattan, the tallest and most prominent visual landmarks along the Brooklyn and Queens East River waterfront include the Queensborough Bridge, the City Lights redevelopment at Hunters Point, Citibank Plaza, the Brooklyn Union Gas (now KeySpan) natural gas storage tanks, and the Williamsburg Bridge. The waterfront itself is almost exclusively industrial, including oil storage tanks, a sugar refinery, lumber facility, etc. Both industrial and residential buildings in Brooklyn and Queens are generally low-rise.
Within Greenpoint and Williamsburg residential areas, the visual setting is consistent with that of an urban neighborhood. Street walls are well defined, and most buildings are residential walk-up apartments. In the industrial blocks between residential areas and the East River, building footprints tend to be large, and façades are long, plain, and uniform. As one moves west, away from the neighborhoods and toward the manufacturing district on the East River, views of the river are quite limited, and access to the waterfront, where prominent views of Manhattan are possible, is generally very limited. The GWAPP Preliminary Report suggests that the lack of visual and physical waterfront access is an issue of concern in the community.
10.3 Information Requirements and Methodology
In Stipulation 10, the methodology for assessing the potential visual impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the Project is proposed to be based upon the CEQR Technical Manual guidelines for Urban Design/Visual Resources (December 1993), and the NYSDEC Policy Memorandum entitled Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts (July 2000).
10.3.1 CEQR Technical Manual
The CEQR Technical Manual recommends an urban design study if a project results in buildings or structures that are substantially different from those that presently exist. This is true of the proposed Project, where building bulk will be substantially greater than at the present Bayside Oil Terminal. The urban design study will address the change to building bulk, height, setbacks, and density. It will also examine streetscape elements - including street furniture (lampposts, signs, sidewalk structures) and the relationship of waterfront industrial facilities to Kent Avenue and the development east of Kent Avenue. Finally, street hierarchy will be addressed. Expressways do not bisect the neighborhood near the facility, and in general there is perhaps a more subtle hierarchy of street patterns in Williamsburg than in other areas of Brooklyn and New York City. (For example, "long" and "short" blocks are in fact similar in length in Williamsburg.) The widest streets in Greenpoint and Williamsburg are not necessarily the most active pedestrian ways.
The visual resources study will concentrate on two distinct components: visibility of the Project site from various points in New York City and the degree to which visual corridors toward the waterfront and Manhattan are and will be available with the construction of the Project. The proposed methodology for the Application borrows from the urban design and visual resources impact criteria contained in CEQR:
· compatibility of the Project with surrounding and nearby development in terms of bulk, building type, setbacks, building arrangement and street patterns; · alteration of streetscape elements, street hierarchy or land uses that define the urban design or visual characteristics of the area; · significant and permanent obstruction of important view or vistas, including seasonal or temporal nature of the view, number and type of viewers, and uniqueness of the view or vista; · changes to or the permanent elimination of natural features or interference with the public's enjoyment of natural features (by blocking views or access); · interference with the visual enjoyment of an historic resource either through impairment of the public's ability to view the historic resource or the alteration of the visual context in which the resource is understood; and · obstruction or interference with the public's enjoyment of waterfront views.
10.3.2 NYSDEC Visual Resources Policy
In July 2000, NYSDEC issued a visual resources assessment and mitigation policy. In this policy, NYSDEC asserts that the state's interest with respect to aesthetic resources is to protect those resources whose scenic character has been recognized through national or state designations. This section addresses the designated lists from which aesthetic resources of statewide significance within the study area can be inventoried, and includes this inventory.
1. A property on or eligible for inclusion in the National or State Register of Historic Places 2. State Parks 3. Urban Cultural Parks 4. National Wildlife Refuges 5. National Natural Landmarks 6. The National Park System 7. Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic or Recreational 8. A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated or eligible for designation as scenic 9. Scenic Areas of Statewide Significance 10. A state or federally designated inter state or inter?county foot trail, or one proposed for designation 11. State Nature and Historic Preserve Areas
TGE proposes to assess all of these types of resources within Community Board One and along the Manhattan waterfront between the Williamsburg Bridge and East 34th Street, such that the buildings and sites with direct views across the East River are examined. Properties on or eligible for listing on the National or State Register of Historic Places will be examined as described in Section 8 of this PSS.
The criterion proposed for assessing the significance of an impact in terms of the State's interest will be its interference with the visual quality of that specific resource, as judged from photographic overlays (discussed below) and a qualitative assessment, which will be presented in the Application.
For any place where a significant adverse impact to an aesthetic resource listed above is established, potential mitigation will be examined in detail. Mitigation can include professional urban design treatments, screening, lighting, materials used, change of dimensions or relative dimensions, good maintenance, alternative technologies, and decommissioning plans. All these types of mitigation will be considered.
10.3.3 Renderings
The Application will present several types of renderings. Architectural renderings (perspective drawings) will be developed to illustrate several near-field components of the Project. Photographic overlays, based on computerized line-of-sight analysis, will be presented for any aesthetic resource being examined pursuant to the above-stated categories. Computerized perspective views will rely on a three-dimensional digitized model of the facility, positioning the viewer at the appropriate receptor point, and specifying a field of view equal to that of the lens used to take the actual photographs. These perspective views are then superimposed on the photographs to present a visual depiction of the view. Photographs of the existing views from selected locations are compared to those with the Project in place. These renderings will be used in the assessment of visual impacts. Additional renderings of views where mitigation is proposed will be included. Appearance of the Project on cold weather days when water vapor stack plumes might be visible will also be analyzed.
10.4 Initial Impact Assessment and Mitigation
The Project's footprint, frontage, and setback will be typical of the industrial buildings in the area. Its height will be several floors high, and exhausts will rise to a height of up to 300 feet, pending detailed engineering and air quality analyses. Ancillary facilities, such as miscellaneous storage tanks, will be smaller and less prominent than the main structures. The switchyard and certain other structures will be located underneath the air-cooled condensers to maximize land use efficiency and minimize visibility.
TGE's efforts will place great emphasis on a proposed architectural design that will permit the Project to respond to its surroundings in an original way. This will be done through a series of mitigation strategies that will be explored further in the Application. At this time, the strategies include:
· Elimination of single-flue exhausts. Single flue exhaust stacks do not resemble other types of structures, and thus are the hallmarks of heavy ("smokestack") industry. By experimenting with the combination of flues (a common practice) in combination with disguise of the dual-flue structure, the Project can achieve a substantially different quality of appearance. · Façade materials and design. Industrial façades can be punctuated by unconventional materials and colors. For example, glass panels, brickwork, or copper trim can be used. Glass can be oriented toward public open spaces or residential areas, with its soft reflectivity a boon to overall urban design. Brick can be used at the site entrance or within building walls. Non-reflective copper can add an earthy tone that nonetheless offers substantial visual interest. · Landscape features. Vegetation can be a prominent feature of Project design, whether it be ivy that is allowed to grow on wires along building façades or fences, well vegetated berms oriented toward public open spaces, or shrub and tree plantings in the vicinity of any public waterfront access. · Volumetric variation. Slight changes in building elevation, notches in the generation building walls, and other types of regular or irregular features can subdivide the overall building bulk and render it much less imposing. · Lighting. Given its urban landscape, the Project can be lit in a manner that maximizes safety, does not interfere with residential areas several blocks away, and allows the illumination of the Bushwick Inlet and/or future waterfront greenways. · Interaction with recreational space. Recreational space, especially baseball fields, have in recent years been intentionally placed in an urban industrial context. Plans to construct baseball fields at the Eastern District Terminal site can be coordinated in terms of orientation of other visual features with the design of the proposed Project.
TGE proposes to conduct design meetings with professional architects as well as laymen from among interested local stakeholders. TGE is committed to building a power plant that will have a positive aesthetic impact on the surrounding area relative to existing conditions, one where opportunities for neighborhood-friendly design are diligently pursued.