APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Documents Document A – New York

Transcription

Environmental Assessment
Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Relocation and Reconstruction
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Documents
Document A – New York City Department of City Planning City Environmental
Quality Review, 2011…………………………….…………………………….…….....3
Document B – 8 Step Process Check List…………………………………….…….…51
APPENDIX B: Figures………………………………………………………………………..57
Figure A – Proposed Project Location Map…………………………………..…...…..58
Figure B – Proposed Project Location Aerial View…………………………..……….60
Figure C – Proposed Elevation Diagram………………………..…………….…….…62
Figure D – Wetlands…………………...………………………..…………….…….…64
Figure E – Firmette………………….....………………………..…………….…….…66
Figure F – Coastal Barrier Resource System….………………..…………….….….…68
APPENDIX C: Correspondences……………………………………………………………...70
Correspondence A – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service………………………….………71
Correspondence B – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation….76
Correspondence C– State of New York Department of State…..….………………........78 -
AppendixA:Documents
Environmental Assessment Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Relocation and Reconstruction DocumentA:
New York City Department of City Planning City Environmental Quality Review
City Environmental Quality Review
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT SHORT FORM •FOR UNLISlED ACTIONS ONLY
Please fill out, print and submit to the appropriate agency (see instructions)
PART I: GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Does Action Exceed Any Typo / Threshold In 8 NYCRR Part 617.4 or 43 RCNY §6-15(A) (Executive Order 91 of 1977, as amended)?
D
[{]
Yes
If yes, STOP, and complete the FULL EAS
2. Project Name
No
-
..
Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Building - Special Permit
3. Reference Numbers
CEQR REFERENCE NUMBER (To BeAsslgnecl by Lead Agency)
BSA REFERENCE NUMBER (If App!lcable)
12DCP012Q
OTHER REFERENCE NUMBER(S) (If Applicable)
ULURP REFERENCE NUMBER (If Applicable)) (e.g. Legislati\18 lntro. CAPA, etc)
4a. Lead Agency Information
4b. Applicant Information
NAME OF APPLICANT
Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Dept. & Ambulance Corps.
NAME OF LEAD AGENCY
NYC Department of City Planning
NAME OF LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON
NAME OF APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE OR CONTACT PERSON
Hiram A. Rothkrug, EPOSCO
Robert Oobruskin
ADDRESS
ADDRESS 55 Water Mill Road
22 Reade Street
CITY New York
TELEPHONE
212-720-3423
STATE NY
IZIP
CITY
10007
FAX 212-720-.3495
Great Neck
TELEPHONE718-343-0026
I STATE NY
I ZIP
I 516-487-2439
11021
FAX
EMAILADDRESS [email protected]
EMAIL ADDRESS [email protected]
5. Project Description:
See attached Project Description.
&a. Project Location: Single Site (for a project at a single site,
complete all the infonnation below)
ADDRESS 305 Cross Bay Boulevard
NEIGHBORHOOD NAME Broad Channel
TAXBLOCKANDLOT Block 15304, Lot450
BOROUGH
I COMMUNITY DISTRICT 14
Queens
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY BY BOUNDING OR CROSS STREETS
South side of 189th Avenue/West 3rd Road between Cross Bay Boulevard and 99th Street/Bert Road EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT, INCLUDING SPECIAL ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION IF ANY:
R3-
I
ZONING SECTIONAL MAP NO: 24d 2
6b. Project Location: Multiple Sites (Provide a description of the size of the project area in both City Blocks and Lots. ff the project would apply to the entire
city or to areas that are so ax tensive that a sitrrspecific description is not appropriate or practicable, describe the area of the project, inclucfing bounding streets, etc.)
7. REQUIRED ACTIONS OR APPROVALS {check all that apply)
City Planning Commission:
D
D
D
[{I
D
D
D
CITY MAP AMENDMENT
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
UNIFORM LANO USE REVIEW
PROCEDURE (ULURP)
CONCESSION
UDAAP
YES
[{I
NOD
Board ofStandards and Appeals:
ZONING CERTIFICATION
D
ZONING AUTHORIZATION
EXPIRATION DATE
D
D
D
D
D
D
YES
D
MONTH
DAY
HOUSING PLAN & PROJECT
SITE SELECTION- PUBLIC FACILITY
D
VARIANCE (USE)
D
VARIANCE (BULK}
FRANCHISE
DISPOSITION
REAL PROPERTY
REVOCABLE CONSENT
ZONING SPECIAL PERMIT, SPECIFY TYPE:
SPECIFY AFFECTED SECTION(S) OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION
[Z]
ZR 74-S7
D
D
MODIFICATION OF
RENEWAL OF
OTHER
NO
IZJ
SPECIAL PERMIT
YEAR
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This Environmental Assessment Statement is filed under the City Environmental Quality
Review (CEQR) in connection with an application made to the NYC City Planning
Commission (CPC) pursuant to Section 74-67 of the Zoning Resolution (ZR) to permit, in
an R3-2 zoning district, the construction of a firehouse, which is contrary to the district use
regulations and requires a Special Permit from the CPC.
The subject site is located at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard (Block 15304, Lot 450) in the Broad
Channel neighborhood of Queens, and consists of an approximately 23,004 square foot
vacant parcel bounded by Cross Bay Boulevard to the ea'st, 99•h Street/Bert Road to the
west, and 1891h Avenue/West 3rd Road to the north. Approximately 5,000 square feet of the
site is paved with asphalt and the remaining approximately 18,000 square feet is overgrown
with weedy vegetation.
The proposed action would facilitate the construction of a two"story, approximately 10,000
square foot fire station on the project site. The facility would be operated by the Broad
Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Department and Ambulance Corps (BCV). The ground floor
would house the facility's emergency vehicles and the second floor would consist of sleeping
quarters, a bathroom, a kitchen, and a meeting room. The fire station would accommodate
BCV-owned vehicles including two fire trucks, two ambulances, and one boat. The facility
would be served by 20 at-grade accessory parking spaces, and access to and from the site
would be provided via two 30'-0" curb cuts onto Cross Bay Boulevard.
The applicant is seeking a Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 74-67 to allow the
construction of a firehouse in an R3-2 district. Fire stations are a Use Group 6
(commercial) use and are not permitted in residential districts without a Special Permit
from the City Planning Commission. The applicant was unable to locate suitable sites in
appropriately zoned districts that would permit the proposed facility as-of-right. The
Special Permit would facilitate the relocation of the existing BCV station house from 15
Noel Road to the proposed location at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard. The existing BCV facility
is in a general state of disrepair, and is inadequate and too small to meet the current needs
of the organization. Upon relocation, the existing building, which the NYS Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) has determined is of historic value, would likely be reused by
the BCV as storage for antique equipment and as a possible home for the Broad Channel
Historical Society's museum.
5
EAS SHORT FORM PAGE 2
Department of Environmental Protection: YES
IF YES, IDENTIFY:
YESD NO [21 Other City Approvals:
D
D
D
D
D
D
D NO [{!
D
D
D
D
D
LEGISLATION
FUNDING OF CONSTRUCTION; SPECIFY:
POLICY OR PLAN; SPECIFY:
LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVAL (not subject to CEQR)
384(b)(4) APPROVAL
RULEMAKING CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES -
FUNDING OF PROGRAMS; SPECIFY: PERMITS; SPECIFY: OTHER; EXPLAIN PERMITS FROM DOT'S OFFICE OF CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION ANO COORD1NATION (OCMC) (not subject to CEQR) State or Federal Actions/Approvals/Funding:
YES D NO [{]
IF "YES." IDENTIFY: 8. Site Description: Except where otherwise indicated,
provide the following information with regard to the directly affected area. The directly affected area
consists of the project site and the area subject to any change in regulatory controls.
GRAPHICS Thft following graphics must be attached and each box must be checked off before the EAS is complete. Each map must clearly depict the boundaries of
the directly affected area or areas and indicate a 400-foot radius drawn from th& outer boundaries of the project'site. Maps may not exceed 11x17 inches in
size and must be folded to 8. 5 x 11 inches for submission
[LJ Site location map
[{]
Zoning map
[{]
Photographs of the project site taken wfthin 6 months of EAS submission and keyed to the site location map
[ZI Sanbom or other land use map
!21
Tax map
D
For large areas or multiple sites, a GIS shape file that defines the project sites
PHYSICAL SETTING (both developed and undeveloped areas)
Total directly affected area (sq. ft.):
23,004 SF Type of Vllaterbody and surface area (sq. ft.):
I Roads, building and other paved surfaces (sq. ft) 5,000 SF
None Other. describe (sq. ft.): 18,004 SF vegetated areas
9. Physical Dimensions and Scale of Project
Size of project to be developed:
(ff the project affects multiple sites, provide the total development below facilitated by the action)
(gross sq. ft)
10,000 SF
Does the proposed project involve changes in zoning on one or more sites?
YEsO
If 'Yes,' identify the total square feet owned or controlled by the applicant
NO
[{]
Total square feet of non-epplicant owned development
Does the proposed project involve in.ground excavation or subsurface disb.Jrbance, including but not flmited to foundation work, plings, utlity fines. or grading? YES [{]
NOD
If 'Yes,' indicate the estimated area and volume dimensions of subsurface disturbance (if known):
Area: 23,004 SF Volume: 23,004 CF
sq. ft (width x length)
cubic feet (width x length
1e
depth)
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USES (please complete the following information as appropriate)
Resident/a/
Size
(in gross sq. ft.) Type (e.g. retail. office, school) Commercial
Community Facility
None
10,000 SF
None
None unb
Firehouse
lndustrlal/Hanufacturlng
None
None
None
Does the proposed project increase the population of residents and/or on-sHe workers? YES
[21
NO
0
Number of additional
workers? Nui:nber of additional
residents?
Provide a brief explanation of how these numbers were determined: An average of 3 persons would be in the station house at any one time.
Does the project create new open space? YES
D
NO
[l}
if Yes (sq.ft)
Using Tabte 14-1, estimate the project's projected operational solid waste generation, If applicable: 300 lbs./week pounds per week)
Using energy modeling or Table 15-1, estimate the project's projected energy use: 2,507 ,000,000 annual BTUs)
Has a No.-Action scenario been defined for this project that differs from the existing condition?
Framework" and describe briefly:
YESD
NO
[l] If 'Yes,' see Chapter 2, "Establishing the Analysis
10. Analysis Year C.f.Q.B. [e,haic.al Maa~al ChaQ~r 2.
ANTICIPATED BUILD YEAR (DATE THE PROJECT WOULD BE COMPLETED ANO OPERATIONAL): 2012
WOULD THE PROJECT BE IMPLEMENTED IN A SINGLE PHASE? YES[{]
j
NOD
I ANTICIPATED
PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION IN MONTHS:
6 months
1F MULTIPLE PHASES. HOW MANY PHASES:
BRIEFLY DESCRIBE PHASES AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE:
-
11. What Is the Predominant Land Use In Vicinity of Project? (Check all that apply)
[{]
RESIDENTIAL
D
MANUFACTURING
[{]
COMMERCIAL
[{]
PARK/FORESi!bPEN SPACE
D
OTHER. Descnbe.
PART II: TECHNICAL ANALYSES
INSTRUCTIONS: The questions in the following table refer to the thresholds for each analysis area in the respective chapter of the
CEQR Technical Manual.
• If the proposed project can be demonstrated not to meet or exceed the thres~old, check the 'NO' box.
• If the proposed project will meet or exceed the threshold, or if this cannot be determined, check the 'YES' box.
• Often, a 'Yes' answer will result in a preliminary analysis to determine whether further analysis is needed. For each 'Yes'
response, consult the relevant chapter of the CEQR Technical Manual for guidance on providing additional analyses (and attach
supporting information, ~ needed) to determine whether detailed analysis is needed. Please n<ite that a 'Yes' answer does
not mean that an EIS must be prepared-it often only means that more information is required for the lead agency to make a
determination of significance.
• The lead agency, upon reviewing Part II, may require an applicant either to provide additional information to support this Short
EAS Form or complete a Full EAS Form. For example, if a question is answered 'No,' an agency may request a short explanation
for this response. In addition, if a large number of the questions are marked 'Yes,' the lead agency may determine that it is
appropriate to require completion of the Full EAS Form.
YES
1. LAND USE, ZONING AND PUBLIC POLICY: CEQ.R
T~ghnigal Manf.!i!.f <;;h;mf§r ~
(a) Would the proposed project result in a change in land use or zoning that is different from surrounding land uses and/or zoning?
Is there the potential to affect an applicable public policy? If uyes", complete a preliminary assessment and attach.
./
(b) Is the project a large, publicly sponsored project? If ~Yes", complete a PlaNYC assessment and attach.
(c) Is any part of the directly affected area within the City's Waterfront Revitalization Program boundaries?
If "Yes", complete the QQnl2il2~!J!:i:Y: A~i§:!i'Hi:!im!ii!:D1 EQ[!]].
2. SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS: CEQR
NO
T~chnical M{l.nu~/ C.h~o.t1l.r
./
./
5
(a) Would the proposed project:
.
Generate a net increase of 200 or more residential units?
./
Generate a net increase of 200,000 or more square feet of commercial space?
./
.
.
Directly displace more than 500 residents?
.
./
Directly displace more than 100 employees?
./
Affect conditions in a specific industry?
./
.
3. COMMUNITY FACILITIES: CEQ.R Teghnical Manual Chaoter 6
(a) Does the proposed project exceed any of the thresholds outlined in Table 6-1 of Qhil!:Qle:r 6?
./
4. OPEN SPACE: CEQR Tc_khnical Manf:!.a/ Cha12ter 7
(a) Would the proposed project change or eliminate existing open space?
./
(b) Is the proposed project within an underserved area in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, or Staten Island?
If "Yes," would the proposed project generate 50 or more additional residents?
./
If "Yes," would the proposed project generate 125 or more additional employees?
(c) Is the proposed project in a well-served area in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, or Staten Island?
If "Yes," would the proposed project generate 300 or more additional residents?
If "Yes," would the proposed project generate 750 or more additional employees?
(d) If the proposed project is not located in an underserved or well-served area, would the proposed project generate:
200 or more additional residents?
500 additional employees?
./
./
./
./
./
YES
NO
5. SHADOWS: CEOR TechnjcalManµa/ChapterB
(a) Would the proposed project result in a net height increase of any structure of 50 feet or more?
,/
(b) Would the proposed project result in any increase in structure height and be located adjacent to or across the street from a
sunlight-sensitive resource?
,/
~
6. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES: CEQR Techojcal Manual Chapter_~
(a) Does the proposed project site or an adjacent site contain any architectural and/or archaeological resource that is eligible for, or
has been designated (or is calendared for consideration) as a New York City Landmark, Interior Landmark or Scenic Landmark;
is listed or eligible for listing on the New York State or National Register of Historic Places; or is within a designated or eligible
New York City, New York State, or National Register Historic District?
,/
If MYes," list the resources and attach supporting infonnation on whether the project would affect any of these resources.
7. URBAN DESIGN: CEOR Technjca/ Manual Chapter 10
(a) Would the proposed project introduce a new building, a new building height, or result in 3ny substantial physical alteration to the
streetscape or public space in the vicinity of the proposed project that is not currently allowed by existing zoning?
,/
(b) Would the proposed project result in obstruction of publicly accessible views to visual resources that is not currently allowed by
existing zoning?
,/
8. NATURAL RESOURCES: CEQR Technical Manual Chapter 11
(a) Is any part of the directly affected area within the Jamaica Bay watershed?
If "Yes," complete the Jamaica Bay watershed Form.
,/
(b) Does the proposed project site or a site adjacent to the project contain natural resources as defined in section 100 of Chapter 11?
If ~Yes," list the resources and attach supporting Information on whether the project would affect any of these resources.
,/
9. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: CEQR TechnicalManua!Chapter12
(a) Would the project allow commercial or residential use in an area that is currently, or was historically, a manufacturing area that
involved hazardous materials?
,/
(b) Does the project site have existing institutional controls (e.g. (E) designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relating to hazardous
materials that preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts?
,/
(c) Would the project require soil disturbance in a manufacturing zone or any development on or near a manufacturing zone or
existing/historic facilities listed in Apru:>ndix 1 (including nonconforming uses)?
,/
(d) Would the project result in the development of a site where there is reason to suspect the presence of hazardous materials,
contamination, illegal dumping or fill, or fill material of unknown origin?
(e) Would the project result in development where underground and/or aboveground storage tanks (e.g. gas stations) are or were
on or near the site?
(f) would the project result in renovation of interior existing space on a site with potential compromised air quality, vapor intrusion
from on-site or off-site sources, asbestos, PCBs or lead-based paint?
,/
(g) Would the project result in development on or near a government-listed voluntary cleanup/brownfield site, current or former po..ver
generation/transmission facilities, municipal incinerators, coal gasification or gas storage sites, or railroad tracks and rights-of-way?
,/
(h) Has a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment been performed for the site?
If 'Yes," were RECs identified? Briefly identify:
,/
,/
,/
10. INFRASTRUCTURE: CEQR Technical Manual Chapter 13
(a) Would the proposed project result in water demand of more than one million gallons per day?
,/
(b) Is the proposed project located in a combined sewer area and result in at least 1,000 residential units or 250,000 SF or more
of commercial space in Manhattan or at least 400 residential units or 150,000 SF or more of commercial space in the Bronx,
Brooklyn, Staten Island or Queens?
,/
(c) Is the proposed project located in a separately sewered area and result in the same or greater development than that listed in
!(Ible 13:1QfCIJagl~c13?
,/
(d) Would the project involve development on a site five acres or larger where the amount of impervious surface would Increase?
,/
(e) Would the project involve development on a site one acre or larger where the amount of Impervious surface wou1d increase and
is located within the Jamaica Bay Watershed or ln certain soecific drainage aceas Including: Bronx River, Coney Island Creek,
Flushing Bay and Creek, Gowanus Canal, Hutchinson River, Newtown Creek, or westchester Creek?
,/
(f) Is the project located in an area that is partially sewered or currenUy unsewered?
,/
(g) Is the project proposing an industrial facility or activity that would contribute industrial discharges to a WNTP andfor generate
contaminated stormwater in a separate storm sewer system?
,/
(h) WOuld the project involve construction of a new stormwater outfall that requires federal and/or state permits?
,/
11. SOUD WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES: CEOR Technical Manual Chapter 14
(a) \Nould the proposed project have the potential to generate 100,000 pounds (50 tons) or more of solid waste per week?
,/
(b} Would the proposed project involve a reduction in capacity at a solid waste management facility used for refuse or recyclables
generated within the City?
,/
YES
NO
12. ENERGY: CEDB. T4'hamMoo.UJl.l Qhapm[ 1Q
(a) Would the proposed project affect the transmission or generation of energy?
./
13. TRANSPORTAllON: CEQR Technjcal Manual Chapter 16
./
(a) Would the proposed project exceed any threshold identified in I~ble: 16:1 Qf C:biUilin lfi?
(b) If uves," conduct the screening analyses, attach appropriate back up data as needed-for each stage, and answer the following
questions:
(1) Would the proposed project result in 50 or more Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) per project peak hour?
If "Yes," would the proposed project result in 50 or more vehicle trips per project peak hour at any given intersection?
./
*"It should be noted that the lead agency may require further analysis of intersections ofconcern even when a project generates
fewer than 50 vehicles in the peak hour. See Subsection 313 of Chapter 16, ·rransporation, u for information.
(2) Would the proposed project result in more than 200 subway/rail or bus trips per project peak hour?
If "Yes,~ would the proposed project result, per project peak hour, in 50 or more b\Js trips on a single line (in one direction)
or 200 subway trips per station or Hne?
./
(3} Would the proposed project result in more than 200 pedestrian trips per project peak hour?
If "Yes, n would the proposed project result in more than 200 pedestrian trips per project peak hour to any given pedestrian
or transit element, crosswalk, subway stair, or bus stop?
./
14. AIR QUAUTY: CEDR I~Dical M.aaual Chanmt.1l
(a) Mobile Soutees: Would the proposed project result in the conditions outlined in Se:~iQO 2 l ll Qf C:bal21f::c l Z?
Stationary Soutees: Would the proposed project result in the conditions ouUined in Sectjon 220 crt Chapter 17?
If 'Yes,' would the proposed project exceed the thresholds in the Figure 17-3, Statjooarv Soucce Screen Graph? (attach
(b) graph as needed)
./
./
./
(c) Does the proposed project involve multiple buildings on the project site?
./
(d) Does the proposed project require Federal approvals, support, licensing, or permits subject to conformity requirements?
./
( ) Does the proposed project site have existing institutional controls (e.g. E-designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relating to air
8
quality that preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts?
./
15. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: CEDR Technical Maaual Qha.pmc. 18.
( ) Is the proposed project a city capital project, a power plant, or would fundamentally change the City's solid waste management
a system?
./
(b) If "Yes, n would the proposed project require a GHG emissions assessment based on the guidance in Qbal21e:c 18?
16. NOISE: CEOR Technical Manual Chaqtec.19
(a) Would the proposed project generate or reroute vehicular traffic?
./
Would the proposed project introduce new or additional receptors (see SecfiQn 124 of Qhaotec 19> near heavily trafficked
(b) roadways, within one horizontal mile of an existing or proposed flight path, or within 1,500 feet of an existing or proposed rail line
with a direct line of site to that rail line?
./
( ) Would the proposed project cause a stationary noise source to operate within 1,500 feet of a receptor with a direct line of sight to
c that receptor or introduce receptors into an area with high ambient stationary noise?
./
(d) Does the proposed project site have existing institutional controls (e.g. E-designations or a Restrictive Declaration) relaUng to
noise that preclude the potential for significant adverse impacts?
./
17. PUBUC HEALTH: CEQR Technical Manual Chapter 20
(a) Would the proposed project warrant a public health assessment based upon the guidance in Cba12ter 2Q?
./
18. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER: CEOB Technical Maa!JEll Qha.ptec. 21
(a) Based upon the analyses conducted for the following technical areas, check yes if any of the following technical areas required
a detailed analysis: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy, Socioeconomic Conditions, Open Space, Historic and Cultural
Resources, Urban Design and Visual Resources, Shadows, Transportation, Noise
If uves, explain here why or why not an assessment of neighborhood character is warranted based on the guidance of in
Chapter 21, uNeighborhood Character." Attach a preliminary analysis, if necessary.
M
./
YES
NO
19 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS: CEQR Technical Manual Chapter 22
would the project's construction activities involve (check all that apply):
Construction activities Jasting longer than
two years;
Construction activities within a Central Business District or along an arterial or major thoroughfare;
./
Require closing, narrowing, or otherwise impeding traffic, transit or pedestrian elements (roadways, parking spaces, bicycle
./
routes, sidewalks, crosswalks, comers, etc);
Construction of multiple buildings where there is a potential for on-site receptors on buildings completed before the final
./
build-out;
The operation of several pieces of diesel equipment in a single location at peak construction;
./
Closure of community facilities or disruption in its service;
./
Activities within 400 feet of a historic or cultural resource; or
./
Disturbance of a site containing natural resources.
./
If any boxes are checked. explain why or why not a preliminary construction assessment is warranted based on the guidance of in Chapter 22,
~construction.n It should be noted that the nature and extent of any commitment to use the Best Available Technology for construction equipment
or Best Management Practices for construction activities should be considered when making this determination.
See discussion of construction impacts in the EAS Narrative Attachment.
20 APPUCANT'S CERTIFICATION
I swear or affirm under oath and subject to the penalties for perjury that the information provided in this Environmental Assessmen
Statement (EAS) is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief, based upon my personal knowledge and familiari
with the information described herein and after examination of pertinent books and records and/or after inquiry of persons who hav
personal knowledge of such information or who have examined pertinent books and records.
Still under oath, I further swear or affirm that I make this statement in my capacity as the
Environmental Consultant
of
Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Oepl & Ambulance Corps.
NAME THE ENTITY OR OWNER
APPLICANT/SPONSOR
the entity which seeks the permits, approvals, funding or other governmental action described in this EAS.
Check if prepared by:
[{]
APPLICANTJREPREsENTAT1VE
or
D
10
LEAD AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE {FOR CITY-SPONSORED PROJECTS)
Digital Tax Map Online - New York City Department of Finance
Page 1 of2
FIGURE 1 • TAX MAP
!we
: Finance
'-·------
Search
I
Legend
II Map Info
Search by selecting one of
the following options. Click
the SEARCH button to map
your location.
Search. Options
Borough I Block I Lot
Borough I Block I Lot
Borough
Queens
Block
15304
Lot
450
I Search
J
Map Key
STREETS
BOU!i_!i!ry. '::,i~~~
http://gis.nyc.gov/dof/dtm/mapviewer.jsf
7/25/2011
•
ZONING MAP
_,
Major Zoning Classlflcatlons:
Th< n~mbor{•) crnl/or l~ltor(s) lhcl folio~•
an R. t;"' M Dist6tl ~~si~notrc" ;Mrc~le•
"'
;z
;z
US<!, bulk ond ~tlior ocrrtml• oo o.sor'b.rt
i~ :h~
te<l of
th~
::'.<lning Re"O'uticn
~
"'
"
R-
RES•DEfiTIA.L D!STP.ICT
C -
COMMERCIA>.. DISl~ICT
M -
~1.\NUFACTURlf:G
DISTPICT
SPEC11'-L PURPOSE DISTRICT
lt<~
'OU.,!•)
I"" ohoO•O
w1\nin
"'"'
"""'~no\5 t"" •pecro• P'"""''"
o,,t,;"' o• ...,.c,;o~ '~ '"• •~d
o•
"'
""'
.. """
...
MAF EFFECTIVE
12
J 0
Q
I 2- 15- 1 96 I
Special Requirements:
c. 0
Fi" " l·st of •ols s~bjed 10 CEO~
environmento' requ;<emMtS, ~ee
APPE~~DIX
lJ 4
.,..._.,_~lurTon
Effective Date(s) of Rezoning:
0
-t-
~4
<:on;ng
~::::::1 AREA(S) PEZOl'JEO
I-
4
I~•
C
For o l;st ol lots ~c;bjecl to "O"
restrict"·" oeclorations, se~
APf1Er.1oi:, a.
I
)'
c
For
•~c<u5i·:mory
HOCJ~·n9
des19noted oreos on !his mop
see Af'PE!·:01-.: i'
4
0
.
0"
Q:
I)
MAP KEY
"'
""
0
rm-
~00
""'
1&l0 FEET
p. ~
<; \.\
24a
24c
2sa
24b
24d
25b
30a
30c
31a
NOT!: lOHIO! 4''<>'m>b<".., <11""'1"" tn" ""'0"
C1-1
Cl-2
C1-3
C1-4
C1-5
C2-1
C2-2
C2-3
C2-4
C2-5
IZ2ZZJi222SBIZ2ZZJ1222Sa==i!ll'i!l!ll!~l!l/li!li!lliWXX!
Non:, ""'"""-'"''"•or"'""''
..'"" '"° '""'";"'"" ""'" ""'""'"'"' '""""'"""°"
°'""'I ;Lounon or r"""""'"'"'"""'na'".,_"'"
Boun~'"'"i 01 llio ;:oo~c '''"°'"""
" .,,"~ V"
I
I
ii~
~=
-Slo N
0. I
~obLOdW
'"""\!!' F0<1'>< """"P-T<>rt>t• '""'"~'""'""'°'°"''°''"""
""'""'zon~Q '"'""'"'"°""'""""'"C'i\ ""'""~g
""".11'1'·9•"''"""""' 00 <OOl0<1tn@ lM"'!1 <0rD'""'''" Cir• ot
il•'1)11J>Jl~I
-c
'II
NQ
c1r1 M,l,P ci-..o.r;c;ES
& 03.'..-1;,-1gg5 C 900437 MMC
~
s
-I
z
~
Area Map
Legend
II
/
,I
,
'/ ,,
.'
')U
, ,,
'i.~-t'
,/
,' v
I
.!. /
I
ffe
,
,
'
/,'
'
'
'
15376
'
'
R3-2
,
I
,, ,,
, , ,,
,,
,
,,
15301
5037 Tax Block
1s
R6
-
'
v
I I Water
D Mapped Park
' '·
Number of Stories
Zoning District
Street Direction
400 Ft. Radius
- - Applicant's Property
-·-·· Park Boundary
- - Shoreline
Mapped Street Lines
Visual Corridors
~ C2~2 Overlay
fxishng I 11nd !JMS'
R- ReSlden11al
RC -
M1~ed
Ocmmere1al/Res,dential
M- Manulacluringllnduslrlal
C - Comme•clal
p. F>ark I Ope" Sl)l!Ctl
Pf - Public F~cll•~es & lnstotutloris
Pl!g ·Parking Faclllltes
FIGURE 4 - PROPOSED SITE PLAN I
6L.OC.K: I~?(~
L.OT: ~50
ZO'NE:
~-2
MAPPED S~T NOT
OPEN • NOT IN USE
( ;:10.00' HIDf:')
( S0.00' FINAL.)
MAP:~
-------=-~ L~~~-----=--- <')~)l.'J ~
• :1 "
"'1 @) 'tr'B; ~ "
'
@
~
1'
!
·•· •
,.~
f, ~",.,
EXISITIN.6 V/> eANT l >TS
I
~
;
~
~
·I·I·Y·
~
11~14
'18-1143-9138
--------------------
®
'
::l!'-"'
llO)
E!Xl5T'e
fflOPOS~
BRI i::;K &
2-$TORY
6LOC.K
Flll'EHOU&e
~
~
~
. •. • · . '
160-SS CftOSS BAY BLVD.
HOWAROBEAC!-1.N.'f.
sum:200
~ ~
©
q•-0•
!
'
·•.
·•·•·•·
JOHN D. CALCAGNILE
ARCHITECT
,--------
~~l~-
·
STREET
I-STORY
AOJAGENT
BUILOING
,'\ ~~
~
CROSS BAY
BLVD,
SITEPLA~N~~~~~~:;;"~=~:,=>~============================================================================:::::::::::::::
SCALE: 11ts•=1•-or
ZONING MAP ZONING COMPUTATION TABLE
,,..
IEG'D~tn'ED
e!SGT. NO
l"IRE GTATION
.,,_,
ZONING DATA
~
. eL.OCK
use
eROV!"(S)
1.:i.=i.4
lkl'<a:i.J:>IST!'i!JC:T
=
15~04
""""""'" ~
. !..OT
NO.
ISSUES I REVISIONS
OATl'
AU. OAAWJHGS N<P V011J1UN MAreuAL A!'l'EAAING J<ERElll CONSTITUTI
ORIGINAL AND ~ PF THE AACH1lKI ANP MAY '<Pr Ill
OUPUCll.TW. USEP OR l'.>ISClD!iED wrtM0UT WRJTiel O'.llOSUIT Of
JO'<llP.CAl.C.OQlll.~
COOJ1'1'1ll'-'ir
PROJECT:
=450 . ZONE = ~-::2
. MAP
= :240
I JOB NO.
='o
FROPO:£D 6ROAD CHANNEL ¥iOCD8TEER FIRE DEPAf!.n•n<r BUILDIN<:> 8 S503 G-~ BAY BOULEVA~ BIW.AO c+IANNfL, N.'r'. <0
~2....11
MAX l"A1l
(23~."'flSf"J
'"'
~2~1
MAX. L.0'1" GCV.
P"eR
~2~2.0451")
l"'!'l:ONT"YAAI:>
~'O-~YA"'1:1
AAfT.'1l
=
5r:i!. EI.
DRAWING TITU:
FL.OT PL.AN
(!S,OOC:O &I")
"
00'
~
O!"S~l.IN!:
BeT'CNO 100
00'
ON~LCT
~ .24-!>:2'
MAX. HT. 01" FRON.T
l'IALl. AflO ~t:>
Flltt:>NT &emAG!C£t
~~-~I
R.!!Q'O l"AAt<:IN<S
~SOOS.!'"
O!"
lb,06.00 50.. l"T.
(lQ,000$1")
,..
'" ""''<
_,,.....,
I
fQR, SROAO c.HANNEJ.. FIRE DEPT.
:;;i~-64
~,,,_
C:1'.0555AV I&<!' AVE
"!"'1"H$T
PROJECT LOCATION
-~
~Al'U!A
= C.;1'-4"XE>O'-O" = 5,000
5ECONp FLOOR = ~'-4"><60'-0'
TOTAL aJILDINe A~
l"T
ET
SGt FT.
SQ
=: '7.000 SG!.
= 10.000
SEAL SCALEo
DRAWN BY:
CHECJ<fl) SY:
OATl'
--2''
2''
•
WILDIN6 ARf:A,
FIRST !'"~OR
~~
·~
~
.IJN'll
DWG. NO.
IS' 55Te-'GKS
=-
A-0.00!
E.PAC-"'S
::!.O' SPAC25
SIGNATURE:
SHEET: I
Of
I
JOHN D. CALCAGNILE
ARCHITECT
-
160-55 CROSS DAY BLVD.
HOWAROBEACHN.Y.
11~14
SUITE200
718-343-9138
I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
II
I I
I I
I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I
I
l?i<tTHA~
NOT OPeN i NOT IN U&E
(~.00' WIDE/ 50.00' PINAL.)
FRONT ELEVATION
@CROSS BAY BLVD.
SCALE: 118*=1'· o•
NO.
OATE
ISSUES / REVISIONS
~l..L OAAWINGS AND
WIUTfEN IUlE'.!Al ......o.R!NG HfRUN CONsllnffi
OPJGUtllLN<Ql.JNl'!B.1$iHl W(J1;lo; Of THE AAQ!IThCI AND MAY~ Ill
O\Jf'l!c;,rm
U!E)QR lllSClil'iE!I Wlll\OlffWRITTEN CONSENT OF
~c
JOl1ND.COl.CAGNlil
=w
PROPOSED EIROAD
cRAf'INEC VOl:Of'IT!:ER FIRE
DEPAl'<T~Ef'IT EIDICDl!<5
I JOB NO.
PROJECT:
e?l05 CROSsaAY 60lJJ..EVARO
~Ji.o
CHANIEb iil:f.
BROA?) ,.HANNa. l"IRe OfPT.
OAAWJNG TITLE:
F'~:
'l'IT~
smeer
NOT OPEN i NOT IN
use
{!>0.00' WIDE/ 50.00 ' FIN.Al..)
A
SEAL
SIDE ELEVATION
@ 189TH AVENUE
EIUIL.DIN6 ELEVATIONS
VD.
SCALE: 1/8"=1'• o~
SCAl.E'
~~
DRAWN BY:
~.
OiEO<ED BY:
OATE
=
.lkl_'ll
OWG. NO.
5-0 00:2
NOiE, THiS DRAV'llN6 15 FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY
SIGNATURE:
SHEET:
2
Of
2
JOHN D. CALCAGNILE
ARCHITECT
-
1SO.SS CROSS !IAY 6~1/0
HOWAROBEACH,N.Y. 11414
SUITE200
118-343-9138
'
l&><rrH A'leN!Je NOT 0FeN 4 NOT IN Lee (;10.ao' HIDf/ ~a.ao· PINAW 10.M'
EAST/WEST SECTION
I
I
:
'
'
''
i~Flw.1. MM'L"'E-ClfV
~·~:
''
/
' ',
NO.
ISSUES J REVISIONS
DATE
"'-1. OAAWl"'.lS ANO WRITTEN ,..,IEIUAt. OPPl;AAJf'lG HEllEl'I Ol'ISITTUll
OR!lilN.oi.. ANO Ulfl'Wl.19'ED WOPJ( Of IHE NIOllIB;T "'1<1) ....V 111)1' Ill
lllJPUOllW U5W OR DISCLOSED wmorr \WITrrN COf<5a<T OF
Jqi<Nl).<;Al.Ol('.nll.f
PROJECT: JOB NO.
-·
=
PROPOSED BROAD
CRA1'1'EL. voCOf;iTEER FIRE
DEFARTMEf;iT BDICDl1'e
GROSSeAY S!..VD.
~!iOSS6A,...
60.Jl..EVAAD
ei;i.o.AD CHANIE.. NY
-------------~---------~++~------
"
w
6RO.AJ? CH.ANNe!.. PIRe. DEFT.
DRAWING TTTl.E:
"°""
SEGTIONS
EAST/WEST SECTION
SCALE: 118"=1 - o',.
Sl'Al'
SCALE'
DRAWN BY:
OiECKED BY:
DATE
DWG. NO.
~=
6~.
=
.,u.1'11
3-0.002
SIGNATURE:
\
ISHEET: I
""
·
2
\
\
Area Map
Legend
15376
R3-2
D
D
5037
~
R6
Waler
Mapped Park
Tax Block
Number of Stories
Zoning District
Street Direction
400 Ft. Radius
Applicant's Property
Park Boundary
Shoreline
Mapped Street Lines
.,.
-c
Visual Corridors
~ C2 2 Overlay
/
i
\
... .--/·
'
..
i
M - Manufac;:tunog/lndustnal
/_
C • Commercial
,..~
P - Park I Open Soace
\-·/'
Pf - Publle Fac1h11e$ & 1ns111u11ons
Pic.g ·Parking Faetl!lles
I /
'<
/
I
\
I
RC - Mlxed Commerclal/Res1ckmtial
./
,/'
' <::"
.,.en
::r:
...00
R - Resldonhal
:-
,
II
::a
m
Ex!sltAA land Uses·
./
'\
C)
y /
\.( i
\/
/
I
I
V - Vacant land
fN<
Scale: 1-
=1
!
.,.
::r:
Cl
Photo 1 View of the subj~ct property at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard, Queens, N.Y., facing southeast from the northern portion of the site. Photo 2
View of the subject property, facing south from the northern portion of the site.
3
View of the subject property, facing southwest from the northern portion of the site. Photo 4 View of the asphalt-paved area in the center of the s ubject property, facing east. 5
View of the western portion of the subject property, facing southeast.
Photo 6
View of the western portion of the subject property, facing northwest.
20
BROAD CHANNEL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT BUILDING
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STATEMENT
INTRODUCTION
Based on the analysis and the screens contained in the Environmental Assessment
Statement Short Form, the only analysis areas that require further explanation include_land
use, zoning, and public policy (including waterfront revitalization), historic and cultural
resources, natural resources, infrastructure, air quality, noise, and construction impacts as
further detailed below. The subject heading numbers below correlate with the relevant
chapters of the CEQR Technical Manual.
II LAND USE, ZONING, AND PUBLIC POLICY
Introduction
The analysis of land use, zoning, and public policy characterizes the existing conditions of the
project site and the surrounding study area; anticipates and evaluates those changes in land use,
zoning, and public policy that are expected to occur independently of the proposed action; and
identifies and addresses any potential impacts related to land use, zoning, and public policy resulting
from the proposed project.
In order to assess the potential for project related impacts, the land use study area has been defined as
the area located within a 400-foot radius of the project site, which is the area within which the
proposed action has the potential to affect land use or land use trends. The 400-foot radius study area
is generally bounded by East l ' 1 Road to the north, East/West 4th Road to the south, the waters of
Jamaica Bay to the east, and West 2nd Road to the west. Various sources have been used to prepare a
comprehensive analysis of land use, zoning and public policy characteristics of the area, including
field surveys, studies of the neighborhood, census data, and land use and zoning maps.
Land Use
Existing Conditions
Site Description
The subject site is located at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard (Block 15304, Lot 450) along the west side of
Cross Bay Boulevard at the comer of 189th Avenue/West 3rd Road and 99th Street/Bert Road in the
Broad Channel neighborhood of Queens. The project site consists of an approximately 23,004 square
foot vacant parcel. Approximately 5,000 square feet of the site is paved and the remaining 18,004
square feet is overgrown with weedy vegetation.
Research into the history of the subject property shows that the site has been vacant land since at
least 1933. The central portion of the property was paved with asphalt in the early 1990s for the
temporary storage of construction equipment and supplies for a nearby municipal infrastructure
project.
September 2011
1
Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Building
___________ll~l l~IMI
1
Surrounding Area
The project site is bordered by Cross Bay Boulevard to the-east, American Legion Post 1404 and
189th Avenue/West 3rd Street (a paper street) to the north, and 99th Street/Bert Road (a paper street)
to the west. A two-story residence adjoins the project site to the south. The two paper streets are
bordered by City owned parkland to the south and west. A parking lot, several vacant parcels, a· two
story residence, and East 3rd Road are located across Cross Bay Boulevard from the project site to the
east. Rows of one- and two-story detached residences interspersed with some vacant parcels line
both sides of Cross Bay Boulevard to the south of the project site. Primarily vacant parcels line both
sides of Cross Bay Boulevard to the north of the project site. The remainder of the 400-foot radius
project study area consists of vacant land and the waters of Jamaica Bay.
No-Build Condition
Under the No-Build Condition, no changes would be made to the project site and the site would
remain vacant and unused.
Surrounding land uses within the immediate study area are expected to remain largely unchanged by
the project build year of 2012. No development plans are known to exist for the vacant parcels
within the study area by the project build year of2012.
Build Condition
The proposed action would facilitate the construction of a two-story, approximately 10,000 square
foot fire station on the project site. The facility would be operated by the Broad Channel Volunteers,
Inc. Fire Department and Ambulance Corps (BCV). The ground floor would house the facility's
emergency vehicles and the second floor would consist of sleeping quarters, a bathroom, a kitchen,
and a meeting room. The fire station would accommodate BCV-owned vehicles including two fire
trucks, two ambulances, and one boat. The facility would be served by 20 at-grade accessory parking
spaces, and access to and from the site would be provided via two 30' -0" curb cuts onto Cross Bay
Boulevard.
All existing vegetation on the subject site would be removed in order to accommodate the proposed
development. A seven-foot wide planter screening strip consisting of trees and other vegetation
would be provided around the entire periphery of the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the
exception of the southern border which would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening
strip. The proposed action would be taken in 2012.
Conclusion
The proposed project would service the surrounding residential community by enabling the
relocation of the existing BCV station house from 15 Noel Road to the proposed location at 305
Cross Bay Boulevard. The existing BCV facility is in a general state of disrepair, and is inadequate
and too small to meet the current needs of the organization or to adequately service the community.
The project site is currently undeveloped and unused.
No potentially significant adverse impacts related to land use are expected to occur as a result of the
proposed action. Therefore, further analysis of land use is not warranted.
September 2011
2
22
___________._lh!liti~llffl
Zoning
Existing Conditions
The project site and the entire surrounding 400-foot radius study area are located within an R3-Z
zoning district. A C2-2 commercial overlay is mapped over the east side of Cross Bay Boulevard
between East 3rd Street and East I" Road generally north of the site.
The R3-2 zoning district is the lowest density zone in wji.ich multiple dwellings are allowed. A
variety of housing types, including garden apartments and rowhouses, are common in this district.
R3-2 districts are mapped in both vacant and built-up areas, and are mapped extensively in Queens
and Staten Island. The R3-2 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 3,800 square feet for
detached units, and a minimum lot size of 1,700 square feet for attached, semi-detached, or other
units. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) in the R3 zone is 0.5 plus 0.1 as an attic allowance for
residential uses and up to 1.0 for community facility uses. The R3 district allows a maximum
permitted lot coverage of 35 percent and a maximum building height of 35 feet. One parking space is
required per dwelling unit.
The C2-2 overlay is intended to accommodate the retail and personal service shops needed in
residential neighborhoods, and is intended to permit a wider range of local retail and service
establishments and to serve a wider neighborhood than C 1 districts. The maximum commercial FAR
for a C2-2 overlay in an R3 zone is 1.0. Residential uses are permitted within these overlays with
residential bulk being governed by the provisions of the surrounding residential zone. Parking
requirements vary by use within the C2-2 zone with one parking space required for each 300 square
feet of commercial floor area.
No-Build Condition
In the future and absent the action, development on the project site would continue to be governed by
the provisions of the existing R3-2 zoning district. No Special Permits would be sought from the
CPC.
Under the No-Build Condition, no changes would be made to the project site and the site would
remain vacant and unused.
No changes are anticipated to the zoning districts and zoning regulations relating to the project site
or the surrounding study area by the project build year of2012.
Build Condition
The applicant is seeking a Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 74-67 to allow the construction of a
firehouse in an R3-2 district. Fire stations are a Use Group 6 (commercial) use and are not permitted
in residential districts without a Special Permit from the City Planning Commission. The applicant
was unable to locate suitable sites in appropriately zoned districts that would permit the proposed
facility as-of-right. The Special Permit would facilitate the relocation of the existing BCV station
house from 15 Noel Road to the proposed location at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard. The existing BCV
facility is in a general state of disrepair, and is inadequate and too small to meet the current needs of
the organization. Upon relocation, the existing building, which the NYS Historic Preservation Office
September 2011
3
23
(SHPO) has determined is of historic value, would likely be reused by the BCV as storage for
antique equipment and as a possible home for the Broad Channel Historical Society's museum.
The proposed BCV station house development would comply with all applicable zoning
bulk provisions including maximum FAR, lot coverage, and building height; required.
yards; and required parking. The proposed facility would also meet the CPC findings
required pursuant to ZR Section 74-67.
Conclusion
The proposed Special Permit would provide the zoning provisions necessary for the proposed project
to proceed. No significant impacts to zoning patterns in the area would be expected. The proposed
project would comply with all the applicable requirements of the R3-2 zoning district. The proposed
action would therefore not have a significant impact on the extent of conformity with the current
zoning in the surrounding area, and it would not adversely affect the viability of conforming uses on
nearby properties.
Potentially significant adverse impacts related to zoning are not expected to occur as a result of the
proposed action, and further assessment of zoning is not warranted.
PUBLIC POLICY
Existing Conditions
The Broad Channel neighborhood of Queens, which is located in Queens Community District 14, is
primarily a one- and two-family residential community with large areas of open space at the northern
and southern ends of the island. According to the 2000 U. S. Census, the population of the area,
which includes other residential communities in the Rockaways, increased by 6.1 percent from
100,596 persons in 1990 to 106,686 people in 2000.
In addition to the zoning provisions discussed above, the project site is subject to the provisions of
the City's Waterfront Revitalization Program (WRP), as the site and the surrounding study area are
located within the City's Coastal Zone Boundary. The project site and the surrounding study area are
also located within the Jamaica Bay Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat, the Jamaica Bay
Wildlife Refuge, and the Jamaica Bay Critical Environmental Area. Wetlands adjoin most of the
periphery of Broad Channel although they don't adjoin the project site.
No other public policies would apply to the proposed action as the project site and the surrounding
400-foot radius study area are not located within the boundaries of any 197-a Community
Development Plans or Urban Renewal Area plans, and also are not within a Historic District.
No-Build Condition
In the future without the action, the project site would continue to be governed by the provisions of
the existing R3-2 zoning district, the City's Waterfront Revitalization Program, and the Jamaica Bay
Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat, Wildlife Refuge, and Critical Environmental Area
policies. No other public policy initiatives are anticipated to pertain to the project site or to the 400foot study area around the property by the project build year of 2012. No changes are anticipated to
September 2011
4
24
----------'-·-·~llfll
any public policy documents relating to the project site or the surrounding study area by the project
build year.
Build Condition
The Waterfront Consistency Assessment Form and a narrative relating to the proposal's
consistency with the applicable waterfront policies are attached hereto. The narrative explains how
the project complies with the policies noted after each Consistency Assessment Form question that
has been affirmatively responded to. The proposed action is consistent with all WRP policies, and
as indicated in the attachment, no significant adverse impacts related to the WRP are anticipated as
a result of the project, and further assessment is not warranted.
The Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form is also
attached hereto.
The proposed development would have no adverse impacts on the Jamaica Bay Significant Coastal
Fish and Wildlife Habitat, Wildlife Refuge, or Critical Environmental Area as is further discussed
in the Natural Resources section below.
No impact to public policies would occur as a result of the proposed action. The proposed new
development would be compatible with the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program
policies applicable to the site, as explained in detail in the Waterfront Consistency attachments to
this document. The proposed development would have no adverse effects on the Jamaica Bay
Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat, Wildlife Refuge, or Critical Environmental Area as
further discussed in the Natural Resources section below.
The proposed action would provide for an upgraded emergency ambulance facility to service the
residents, workers, and visitors to the Broad Channel community.
Conclusion
In accordance with the stated public policies within the study area, the action would be an
appropriate development on the project site, would be a positive addition to the surrounding
neighborhood, and would serve to further the goals of the existing public policies for the area.
No potentially significant adverse impacts related to public policy are anticipated to occur as a result
of the proposed action, and further assessment of public policy is not warranted.
No significant adverse impacts related to land use, zoning, and public policy are anticipated to occur
as a result of the action. The action is not expected to result in any of the conditions that warrant the
need for further assessment of land use, zoning, or public policy.
September 2011
5
25
NEW YORK CITY WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM
Consistency Assessment Form
Proposed actions that are subject to CEQR, ULURP or other local, state or federal discretionary review procedures,
and that are within New York City's designated coastal zone, must be reviewed and assessed for their consistency
with the New York City Watetfront Revitalization Prooram (WRP). The WRP was adopted as a 197-a Plan by the
Council of the City of New York on October 13, 1999, and subsequently approved by the New York State Department
of State with the concurrence of the United States Department of Commerce pursuant to applicable state and federal
law, including the Waterfront Revitalization of Coastal Areas and Inland Waterways Act. As a result of these
approvals, state and federal discretionary actions within the city's coastal zone must be consistent to the maximum
extent practicable with the WRP policies and the city must be given the' opportunity to comment on all state and
federal projects within its coastal zone.
This form is intended to assist an applicant in certifying that the proposed activity is consistent with the WRP. It
should be completed when the local, state, or federal application is prepared. The completed form and accompanying
information will be used by the New York State Department of State, other state agencies or the New York City
Department of City Planning in their review of the applicant's certification of consistency.
A. APPLICANT
1.
Name: Hiram A. Rothkrug, Director, EPDSCO, for Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc.
2.
Address: 55 Water Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021
3_
Telephone: 718-343-0026
4_
Project site owner: Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Dept. & Ambulance Corps.
Fax: 516-487-2439
E-mail: [email protected]
B. PROPOSED ACTIVITY
1.
Brief description of activity:
The proposed action seeks a Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 74-67 to allow the
construction of a firehouse in an R3-2 district. The proposed action would facilitate the
construction of a two-story, approximately 10,000 square foot fire station on the project site.
The facility would be served by 20 at-grade accessory parking spaces, and access to and from
the site would be provided via two curb cuts onto Cross Bay Boulevard. The facility would be
operated by the Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Department and Ambulance Corps (BCV).
2.
Purpose of activity:
The Special Permit would facilitate the relocation of the existing BCV station
house from 15 Noel Road to the proposed location at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard.
The existing BCV facility is in a general state of disrepair, and is inadequate and
too small to meet the current needs of the organization.
3.
Location of activity: (street address/borough or site description):
305 Cross Bay Boulevard along the south side of 189th Avenue//West 3rd Road
between Cross Bay Boulevard and 99th Street/Bert Road (Block 15304, Lot
450), Queens
I
WRP consistency form - January 2003
26
Proposed Activity Cont'd
4. If a federal or state permit or license was issued or is required for the proposed activity, identify the permit
type(s), the authorizing agency and provide the application or permit number(s), if known:
N/A
5. Is federal or state funding being used to finance the project? If so, please identify the funding source(s).
N/A
6. Will the proposed project require the preparation of an environmental impact statement?
Yes
No
./
If yes, identify Lead Agency:
7. Identify city discretionary actions, such as a zoning amendment or adoption of an urban renewal plan, required
for the proposed project. The proposed action seeks a City Planning Commission Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 74-67 to allow the construction of a firehouse in an R3-2 district, which is contrary to the district use regulations.
C. COASTAL ASSESSMENT
Location Questions: Yes
No
1. Is the project site on the waterfront or at the water's edge?
./
2. Does the proposed project require a waterfront site?
3. Would the action result in a physical alteration to a waterfront site, including land along the
./
shoreline, land underwater, or coastal waters?
Policy Questions Yes
No
The following questions represent, in a broad sense, the policies of the WRP. Numbers in parentheses after each question indicate the policy or policies addressed by the question. The new Waterfront Revitalization Program offers detailed explanations of the policies, including criteria for consistency determinations. Check either "Yes" or "No" for each of the following questions. For all "yes" responses, provide an attachment assessing the effects of the proposed activity on the relevant policies or standards. Explain how the action would be consistent with the goals of those policies and standards. 4. Will the proposed project result in revitalization or redevelopment of a deteriorated or under-used waterfront site? (1) 5. Is the project site appropriate for residential or commercial redevelopment? (1.1) 6. Will the action result in a change in scale or character of a neighborhood? (1.2)
./
./
./
2
Yes
Policy Questions cont'd
No
7. Will the proposed activity require provision of new public services or infrastructure in undeveloped or sparsely populated sections of the coastal area? (1.3)
./ 8. Is the action located in one of the designated Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas (SMIA): South Bronx, Newtown Creek, Brooklyn Navy Yard, Red Hook, Sunset Park, or Staten Island? (2)
./ 9. Are there any waterfront structures, such as piers, docks, bulkheads or wharves, located on the project sites? (2)
./
10. Would the action involve the siting or construction of a facility essential to the generation or transmission of energy, or a natural gas facility, or would it develop new energy resources? (2.1)
./ ./
11. Does the action involve the siting of a working waterfront use outside of a SMIA? (2.2) 12. Does the proposed project involve infrastructure improvement, such as construction or repair of piers, docks, or bulkheads? (2.3, 3.2)
·
./ 13. Would the action involve mining, dredging, or dredge disposal, or placement of dredged or fill materials in coastal waters? (2.3, 3.1, 4, 5.3, 6.3)
./ 14. Would the action be located in a commercial or recreational boating center, such as City Island, Sheepshead Bay or Great Kills or an area devoted to water-dependent transportation? (3)
./ 15. Would the proposed project have an adverse effect upon the land or water uses within a commercial or recreation boating center or water-dependent transportation center? (3.1) ./
16. Would the proposed project create any conflicts between commercial and recreational boating?
(3.2)
./
17. Does the proposed project involve any boating activity that would have an impact on the aquatic environment or surrounding land and water uses? (3.3)
18. Is the action located in one of the designated Special Natural Waterfront Areas (SNWA): Long Island Sound- East River. Jamaica Bay, or Northwest Staten Island? {4 and 9.2)
19. Is the project site in or adjacent to a Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat? (4.1)
./ ./ ./
20. Is the site located within or adjacent to a Recognized Ecological Complex: South Shore of Staten Island or Riverdale Natural Area District? (4.1 and 9.2)
21. Would the action involve any activity in or near a tidal or freshwater wetland? (4.2)
22. Does the project site contain a rare ecological community or would the proposed project affect a vulnerable plant, fish, or wildlife species? (4.3)
23. Would the action have any effects on commercial or recreational use of fish resources? (4.4) ./ ./
./ ./
24. Would the proposed project in any way affect the water quality classification of nearby waters or be unable to be consistent with that classification? (5)
./ 25. Would the action result in any direct or indirect discharges, including toxins, hazardous substances, or other pollutants, effluent, or waste, into any waterbody? (5.1)
./ 26. Would the action result in the draining of stormwater runoff or sewer overflows into coastal waters?
(5.1)
27. Will any activity associated with the project generate nonpoint source pollution? (5.2)
28. Would the action cause violations of the National or State air quality standards? (5.2)
./ ./
./
3
28
Yes
No
29. Would the action result in significant amounts of acid rain precursors (nitrates and sulfates)?
(5.2C)
./
30. Will the project involve the excavation or placing of fill in or near navigable waters, marshes,
estuaries, tidal marshes or other wetlands? (5.3)
./
31. Would the proposed action have any effects on surface or ground water supplies?
.f_
(5.4)
32. Would the action result in any activities within a federally designated flood hazard area or state
designated erosion hazards area? (6)
33. Would the action result in any construction activities that would lead to erosion? (6)
./ ./
34. Would the action involve construction or reconstruction of a flood or erosion control structure?
(6.1)
./
35. Would the action involve any new or increased activity on or near any beach, dune, barrier
island, or bluff? (6.1)
./
36. Does the proposed project involve use of public funds for flood prevention or erosion control?
(6.2)
37. Would the proposed project affect a non-renewable source of sand ? (6.3)
38. Would the action result in shipping, handling, or storing of solid wastes, hazardous materials, or
other pollutants? (7)
39. Would the action affect any sites that have been used as landfills? (7.1)
./
./
./
./
40. Would the action result in development of a site that may contain contamination or that has
a history of underground fuel tanks, oil spills, or other form or petroleum product use or
storage? (7.2)
41. Will the proposed activity result in any transport, storage, treatment, or disposal of solid was tes
or hazardous materials, or the siting of a solid or hazardous waste facility? (7.3)
./
42. Would the action result in a reduction of existing or required access to or along coastal waters,
public access areas, or public parks or open spaces? (8)
./
43. Will the proposed project affect or be located in, on, or adjacent to any federal, state, or city
park or other land in public ownership protected for open space preservation? (8)
44. Would the action result in the provision of open space without provision for its maintenance?
(8.1)
45. Would the action result in any development along the shoreline but NOT include new water
enhanced or water-dependent recreational space? (8.2)
46. Will the proposed project impede visual access to coastal lands, waters and open space? (8.3)
47. Does the proposed project involve publicly owned or acquired land that could accommodate
waterfront open space or recreation? (8.4)
48. Does the project site involve lands or waters held in public trust by the state or city?
(8.5)
./
./
./
./
./
49. Would the action affect natural or built resources that contribute to the scenic quality of a
coastal area? (9)
./
50. Does the site currently include elements that degrade the area's scenic quality or block view s
to the water? (9.1)
./
4
29
Yes
No
51. Would the proposed action have a significant adverse impact on historic, archeological, or cultural resources? (10) 52. Will the proposed activity affect or be located in, on, or adjacent to an historic resource listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or designated as a landmark by the City of New York? (10) ./
0. CERTIFICATION
The applicant or agent must certify that the proposed activity is consistent with New York City's Waterfront
Revitalization Program, pursuant to the New York State Coastal Management Program. If this certification cannot be
made, the proposed activity shall not be undertaken. If the certification can be made, complete this section.
"The proposed activity complies with New York State's Coastal Management Program as expressed in New York
City's approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, pursuant to New York State's Coastal Management
Program, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program."
ApplicanUAgent Name: Hiram A. Rothkrug, Director, EPDSCO
Address: 55 Water Mill Road, Great Neck, NY 11021
ApplicanUAgent Signature:_......
5
30
Broad Channel Firehouse
Explanation of Consistency with Waterfront Policies
1. Policy 1.1: Encourage commercial and residential redevelopment in appropriate coastal zone
areas.
The project site is an appropriate location for the proposed development and meets the criteria of Policy
I.I as described below.
A. Criteria to determine areas appropriate for reuse through public and private actions include: the lack
of importance of the location to the continued.functioning of the designated Special Natural Wateifront
Areas or Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas; the absence of unique or significant natural features
or, ifpresent, the potential for compatible development; the presence ofsubstantial vacant or underused
land; proximity to residential or commercial uses; the potential for strengthening upland residential or
commercial areas and for opening up the wateifront to the public; and the number ofjobs potentially
displaced balanced against the new opportunities created by redevelopment.
Relative to Policy I. I A., although the project site is not designated as a Significant Maritime and
Industrial Area (SMIA), it is located within the Jamaica Bay Special Natural Waterfront Area (SNWA).
However, the proposed action would have no adverse effects on the Jamaica Bay SNWA as the project
site does not border the shoreline and does not contain any unique or significant natural features. The
project site is currently vacant and undeveloped with surface areas of the site covered with a mix of
asphalt pavement and weedy overgrowth. The site is located in an area primarily developed with
residential, community facility, and commercial uses along a busy roadway.
As no natural gas service is available in the vicinity of the project site, the proposed fire station would
contain an above ground tank that would store fuel oil for use as a back-up fuel source for the facility's
generator and for heating and other power needs. The storage tank would be located in a mechanical room
on an elevated platform which would protect the tank from any coastal flooding.
The proposed action would result in the development and productive use of the long vacant project site.
The proposed fire station would be compatible with and of benefit to the surrounding residential,
community facility, and commercial uses. No jobs would be displaced by the action and new jobs would
be provided on the site.
Development of the proposed project would have no impact upon public access to the waterfront as the
project site is not located on the waterfront. Physical and visual public access to the Raunt Shad Creek to
the north and west wou Id continue to be available from 189'" Avenue adjacent to the site as well as from
other nearby streets.
B. Public actions, such as property disposition, Urban Renewal Plans, and infrastructure provision,
should facilitate redevelopment of underused property to promote housing and economic development
and enhance the city's tax base.
The proposed project would not involve any of the public actions noted under Policy I. I B. and therefore
this policy does not apply to the proposed action.
31
2. Policy 4: Protect and restore the quality and function of ecological systems within the New York
City coastal area.
The project site is approximately two blocks from the waters of Jamaica Bay. The site has been vacant
land since at least 1933. The central portion of the property wa!i paved with asphalt in the early 1990s for
the temporary storage of construction equipment and supplies for a nearby municipal infrastructure
project. The site has gradually been reverting to its natural state with areas of weedy growth surrounding
the paved surfaces on the site. This site is of minimal ecological value. Surrounding parcels are primarily
developed with residential, community facility, and commercial uses although areas to the west consist of
unimproved parkland. The proposed development would have no significant adverse effects on the quality
and function of ecological systems within the New York City coastal area.
The project site is located approximately 300 feet from the shoreline of Jamaica Bay at its closest point.
Jamaica Bay is designated as a SNWA due to the important coastal ecosystem features that it contains
which are protected under the Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat and Tidal and Freshwater
Wetlands regulations. The primary impact that the proposed action would have on Jamaica Bay would be
from storm water runoff leaving the site some of which would likely flow overland eventually reaching
the Bay. However, storm water runoff would not be significantly greater than what currently leaves the
project site due to its partially paved surfaces.
3. Policy 4.1: Protect and restore the ecological quality and component habitats and resources
within the Special Natural Waterfront Areas, Recognized Ecological Complexes, and Significant
Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats.
Jamaica Bay, located approximately 300 feet from the project site at its closest point, is designated as a
SNWA, and is also designated as a Critical Environmental Area (CEA) and a Significant Coastal Fish and
Wildlife Habitat by New York State, and as a National Wildlife Refuge and a National Recreation Area
by the Federal government.
A. Avoid activities that may cause or cumulatively contribute to permanent adverse changes to the
ecological complexes and their natural processes. When avoidance is not possible, minimize the impacts
of the project to the extent feasible and mitigate any physical loss or degradation of ecological elements.
Use mitigation measures that are likely to result in the least environmentally damaging feasible
alternative.
Relative to Policy 4.1 A., the proposed project would result in minimal potential impacts to Jamaica Bay
from a small amount of storm water runoff from the site that could eventually reach the Bay. A portion of
the storm water that currently falls on the project site already runs off onto the surrounding streets as the
site is partially paved. Due to the small size of the property and the relatively small amount of additional
paved area that would be added for the proposed project, it is not anticipated that the additional runoff
would have any significant adverse effects on Jamaica Bay.
B. Avoid.fragmentation of natural ecological communities and maintain corridors to facilitate the.free
exchange of biological resources within and among these communities. Protect those sites which have
been identified as key to maintaining habitat connections within the ecological complexes.
The project site does not contain any natural ecological communities and does not serve as a corridor for
the exchange of biological resources within and among such communities. Therefore, relative to Policy
2
32
4.1 B., the proposed development would not result in the fragmentation of any natural ecological
communities and would have no effect on corridors between these communities.
D. Where practical, restore ecological complexes so as to ensure their continued existence as natural,
self-regulating systems.
··
Policy 4.1 D. is not relevant to the proposed action as the project site does not contain any ecological
complexes.
E. Protect designated Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats from land or water uses or
development which would:
• destroy habitat values associated with the designated habitat through direct physical alteration,
disturbance, or pollution, or indirect effects ofactions that would result in a loss ofhabitat; or
• significantly impair the viability ofthe designated habitat beyond the tolerance range ofimportant fish
or wildlife species which rely on the habitat values within the designated area through: degradation of
existing habitat elements, change in environmental conditions, functional loss ofhabitat values, or
adverse alteration ofphysical, biological, or chemical characteristics.
Where destruction or significant impairment ofhabitat values cannot be avoided, the potential impacts of
land use or development should be minimized and any resulting losses ofhabitat mitigated to the extent
practicable.
Policy 4.1 E. relates to the protection of Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats from damaging
land or water uses or development. Jamaica Bay is considered to be a Significant Coastal Fish and
Wildlife Habitat and, as stated above, the only potential impact of the proposed development on the Bay
would result from a small amount of storm water runoff from the site into the Bay. As explained above,
due to the small size of the property and the relatively small amount of additional paved area that would
be added to the site for the proposed project, it is not anticipated that the additional runoff would have any
significant adverse effects on Jamaica Bay.
F. Protect indigenous plants from excessive loss or disturbance and encourage greater quantity and
diversity ofindigenous plants to the extent practical. Avoid use ofnon-indigenous plants except in
ornamental gardens, as collector specimens, or for erosion control andfiltration provided that it is not
feasible to use native species to perform the same functions. Avoid use ofnon-indigenous plants that are
invasive species likely to alter existing natural community composition. Where destruction or significant
impairment ofplants cannot be avoided, the potential impacts ofland use or development should be
minimized and any resulting losses ofplants mitigated to the extent practicable.
The only plants located on the project site are weedy species that have gradually been colonizing areas
adjacent to the paved surfaces on the site. These plants would be removed to facilitate the proposed
development. A seven-foot wide planter screening strip consisting of trees and other vegetation would be
provided around the entire periphery of the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the exception of
the southern border which would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening strip. Due to the
small size of the property and the low quality nature of its existing vegetation, it is not anticipated that the
proposed project would result in any significant adverse impacts to vegetation.
3
33
Policy 4.2: Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands.
The project site and the immediately adjacent areas do not contain any State designated freshwater
wetlands. However, Jamaica Bay, which is located approximately 300 feet from the site at its closest
··
point, has a significant concentration of tidal wetlands.
A. Prevent the net loss ofwetlands by: (1) avoiding the draining of. placement offill in or excavation of
wetlands; (2) minimizing adverse impacts resulting.from unavoidable draining, fill, excavation or other·
activities; or (3) providing mitigation for any adverse impacts which may remain after all appropriate
andpracticable minimization measures have been taken. These are presented in order ofdescending
preference with (1) being the most effective andpreferred option.·
In accordance with Policy 4.2 A., the proposed development would not result in any draining of,
placement of fill in, or excavation of any the wetland areas associated with Jamaica Bay. The only
potential impact from the proposed development to wetlands within the Jamaica Bay watershed would be
from the potential inflow of a small amount of storm water runoff from the project site. Storm water
draining from the project site currently enters these wetland areas and the amount of runoff would
increase slightly under the proposed action due to the greater amount of impervious coverage that would
exist on the site following development. However, impacts to Jamaica Bay's wetlands from storm water
runoff from the project site are not expected to be significant due to the small size of the property and the
relatively small amount of additional paved area that would be added to the site for the proposed project.
B. Maintain or create indigenous vegetative buffers between wetlands and nearby uses to protect the
wetland's character, quality, values, andfunctions. Buffers should be designed and maintained to
preserve hydrologic balance within the wetland and between the wetland and surrounding upland area.
The adequacy ofthe buffer width and composition is determined by: (1) the potential for adverse effects
associated with the proposed or existing use; (2) the nature and importance ofthe wetland and its
benefits to the ecological complex; (3) the direction andflow ofsurface water between a use and the
wetland; and (4) the necessity to achieve and maintain a high filtration efficiency or surface runoffas
determined by vegetative cover type, soil characteristics, and slope ofland. In all cases, the buffer must
not be less than that required by state law. If site constraints do not allow sufficient buffer width, consider
other management measures or design alternatives to preserve or achieve hydrologic balance.
Relative to Policy 4.2 B., the proposed action would not remove or otherwise impact any existing
vegetative buffers around Jamaica Bay. Due to the small size ofthe property and its distance from
Jamaica Bay, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would have any significant adverse impact on
the wetlands of Jamaica Bay.
C. In the SNWAs and Recognized Ecological Complexes, restore tidal wetlands and.freshwater wetlands
wherever practical to foster their continued existence as natural, self-regulating systems. As site
conditions require, wetlands restoration efforts should include reconstruction oflost physical conditions
to maximize wetlands values, adjustment ofaltered chemical characteristics, reintroduction ofindigenous
flora to emulate natural conditions, and enhancement ofadjacent areas to provide natural buffers to
wetlands.
Policy 4.2 C. relates to SNW As and Recognized Ecological Complexes which, in the area of the site,
would be relevant to Jamaica Bay. The proposed development does not include any measures to restore
the wetland areas of Jamaica Bay as the project site does not border Jamaica Bay and is located
4
34
300 feet from the Bay at its closest point. As discussed above, the only potential impact to
the Bay from the proposed development would be from inflows of a small amount of storm water runoff,
and this impact is not expected to be significant due to the small size ofthe property and the relatively
small amount of additional paved area that would be added to tile site for the proposed project.
5. Policy 6: Minimize loss of life, structures and natural resources caused by flooding and erosion.
The project site is mapped within the I 00-year flood zone on the Federal Emergency Management Area
(FEMA) flood insurance maps. The development plan for the project requires that all construction comply
with FEMA A-Zone flood hazard regulations. This requirement is based on the potential for major storms
to impact the project site. Thus, the first floor of habitable space iii the proposed building would be
required to be at least one foot above the I 00 year flood elevation. The proposed development would
exceed all applicable State and Federal standards for the protection of lives and structures in coastal areas.
Based on the NYC Building Code, the proposed fire station is classified as a structural occupancy and is
required to have its lowest floor located a minimum of two inches above. the base flood elevation.
Although detailed design drawings have not yet been prepared for the facility, the lowest floor of the
proposed firehouse would exceed the minimum two inch height above base flood elevation. In addition,
the proposed mechanical room containing most of the building's mechanicals and critical systems would
be constructed on an elevated platform at a height of7.0 feet or higher above the base flood elevation.
The building's HVAC system would be located on the roof of the structure.
The project site is located within Hurricane Evacuation Zone B. Emergency preparedness plans include
the timely notification of area residents to evacuate the area by public transit. The New York City Office
of Emergency Management also provides information relating to emergency preparedness for hurricanes
and other natural and man-made disasters on its website.
The proposed action would have no impact upon the erosion and flood control functions of the natural
shoreline of the nearby Jamaica Bay SNWA as the project would not be located along Jamaica Bay and
would result in no construction disturbance of the Bay's shoreline. The only impact of the proposed
action on Jamaica Bay would be from storm water runoff. However, due to the small size of the property
and its distance from Jamaica Bay, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would have any
significant adverse impact on the wetlands of Jamaica Bay. The proposed development would not result
in a significant adverse impact on Jamaica Bay.
6. Policy 8: Provide public access to and along New York City's coastal waters.
The project site does not border any coastal waters including the waters of Jamaica Bay. However, the
property does border unimproved parkland to the west that adjoins Jamaica Bay. The proposed
development would have no impact upon access to these parklands. Access to these areas is not currently
available from the project site which is surrounded by fencing preventing such access. No new access
over the property would be provided. However, physical and visual public access to the Raunt Shad Creek
to the north and west would continue to be available from 189'h Avenue/West 3'd Street adjacent to the
site as well as from other nearby streets.
5
Policy 9.2: Protect scenic values associated with natural resources.
A. In the Special Natural Area Districts (SNAD), SNWAs and Recognized Ecological Complexes, avoid
structures or activities that interrupt landscapes, including introduction ofdiscordant elements such as
intrusive artificial light sources, fragmentation ofand structural intrusion into open space areas, and
changes to the continuity and corifi.guration ofnatural shorelines and associated vegetation.
The proposed development would not introduce discordant elements such as intrusive artificial light
sources, fragmentation of and structural intrusion into open space areas, and changes to the continuity and
configuration of natural shorelines and associated vegetation. On-site lighting would be motion detector
activated and would have minimal impacts on adjacent areas. The· proposed development would not
fragment or intrude on the adjacent open space areas. The project would also have no effect on the
continuity and configuration of natural shorelines and associated vegetation which are located
approximately 300 feet from the project site.
B. In SNADs, SNWAs and Recognized Ecological Complexes, design new development to complement the
scenic character ofnatural resources. Minimize and screen discordant elements which cannot be
inconspicuously located.
A seven-foot wide planter screening strip consisting of trees and other vegetation would be provided
around the entire periphery of the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the exception of the
southern border which would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening strip. This would serve
to screen the development from outside view.
6
36
Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan
Project Tracking Form
The Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan, developed pursuant to Local Law 71of2005, mandates that
the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) work with the Mayor's Office of
Environmental Coordination (MOEC) to review and track proposed development projects in the Jamaica
Bay Watershed (http://www.nyc.gov/html/oec/downloads/pdf/ceqr/Jamaica_Bay_ Watershed_Map.jpg)
that are subject to CEQR in order to monitor growth and trends. If a project is located in the Jamaica Bay
Watershed, (the applicant should complete this form and submit it to DEP and MOEC. This form must be
updated with any project modifications and resubmitted to DEP and MOEC.
The information below will be used for tracking purposes only. It is not intended to indicate whether further CEQR
analysis is needed to substitute for the guidance offered in the relevant chapters of the CEQR Technical Manual.
A. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
la. Modification
1.
CEQR Number:
2.
Project Name:
3.
Project Description:
D
Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Building - Special Permit
The proposed action would result in the construction of a two-story, approximately 10,000 square foot
fire station on the project site. The facility would be served by 20 at-grade accessory parking spaces,
and access to and from the site would be provided via two curb cuts onto Cross Bay Boulevard.
4.
Project Sponsor:
5.
Required approvals:
6.
Project schedule (build year and construction schedule):
Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire Department & Ambulance Corps.
City Planning Commission Special Permit pursuant to ZR Section 74-67
l~2_01_2_;_G_m_o_n_t_hs_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~
B. PROJECT LOCATION:
1.
Street address: 305 Cross Bay Boulevard, Broad Channel, Queens
2.
Tax block(s):
3.
Identify existing land use and zoning on the project siteJvacant/undeveloped; R3-2
4.
Identify proposed land use and zoning on the project site: IFire department building; R3-2
5.
Identify land use of adjacent sites (include any open space): open space, resid, community facility
6.
Describe existing density on the project site and the proposed density:
~11_53_0_4_ _ _ _ _ _~1 Tax Lot(s):
"-45_0_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____J
Proposed Condition
Existing Condition
!Vacant 23,004 SF site
7.
2-story, 10,000 SF fire station with 20
accessory parking spaces
Is project within 100 or 500 year floodplain (specify)? ~ 100 Year
D
500 Year
D No
Page 1of3
C. GROUND AND GROUNDWATER
1. Total area of in-ground disturbance, if any (in square feet): l'-N_o_ne_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~
2. Will soil be removed (if so, what is the volume in
cubi~_yards)? '-IN_o_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~
3. Subsurface soil classification: (per the New York City Soil and Water Conservation Board): lsigapple-Fortress Complex 4. If project would change site grade, provide land contours (attach map showing existing in 1'
contours and proposed in 1' contours).
5. Will groundwater be used (list volumes/rates)?
D Yes· 181 No
Volumes: Rates:
6. Will project involve dewatering (list volumes/rates)?
D Yes
181 No
Volumes: Rates:
7. Describe site elevation above seasonal high groundwater:
The seasonal high water table is between 18 and 40 inches below the surface for a significant period
during the growing season.
D. HABITAT
1. Will vegetation be removed, particularly native vegetation?
181 Yes
D No
If YES,
-Attach a detailed list (species, size and location on site) of vegetation to be removed
(including trees >2" caliper, shrubs, understory planting and groundcover).
- List species to remain on site.
- Provide a detailed list (species and sizes) of proposed landscape restoration plan (including
any wetland restoration plans).
2. Is the site used or inhabited by any rare, threatened or endangered species?
3. Will the project affect habitat characteristics?
D Yes
D Yes
181 No
181 No
If YES, describe existing wildlife use and habitat classification using "Ecological Communities of
New York State." at http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/29392.html.
4. Will pesticides, rodenticides or herbicides be used during construction?
D Yes
181 No
If YES, estimate quantity, area and duration of application.
5. Will additional lighting be installed?
181 Yes
D No
If YES and near existing open space or natural areas, what measures would be taken to reduce
light penetration into these areas?
Lighting would be motion detector activated and would have minimal impacts on adjacent areas.
Page 2 of 3
SURFACE COVERAGE AND CHARACTERISTICS
(describe the following for both the existing and proposed condition):
Proposed Condition
Existing Condition
1.
Surface area:
Roof:
l~N_o_n_e----------~
Pavement/walkway: Approximately 5,000 SF
Grass/softscape: Approximately 18,004 SF
Other (describe):
Approximately 5,000 SF
LIN_o_n_e-----------~
2.
Wetland (regulated or non-regulated) area and classification:
3.
Water surface area:
4.
Stormwater management (describe):
Existing - how is the site drained?
Site currently drains via percolation into the subsurface of the site and overland flow onto adjoining
streets and properties.
Proposed - describe, including any infrastructure improvements necessary off-site:
Site would drain via percolation into the subsurface of the site under unpaved areas and via overland
flow onto the adjoining streets and properties.
Page 3 of 3
Attachment to Jamaica Bay Watershed Protection Plan Project Tracking Form
O. HABITAT
1. Will vegetation be removed, particularly native vegetation?
If YES, -Attach a detailed list (species, size and location on site) of vegetation to be removed (including
trees >2" caliper, shrubs, understory planting and groundcover). - Ust species to remain on site. - Provide
o detailed list (species and sizes) af proposed landscape restoration plan (including any wetland
restoration plans).
The project site consists of an approximately 23,004 square foot vacant parcel, approximately
5,000 square feet of which is paved with asphalt. The remairting approximately 18,000 square
feet of the site is overgrown with weedy vegetation consisting of grasses, shrubs, and small
trees of less than 2:' caliper. The vegetation on the site is second growth typical of disturbed site
conditions. No significant vegetation or habitats are located on the project site. Although the
immediately adjacent area to the west of the project site consists of unimproved parkland which
borders the waters of Jamaica Bay, the project site is adjoined by a major roadway, Cross Bay
Boulevard, and residential and community facility uses on its remairting three sides.
All existing vegetation on the site would be removed to accommodate the proposed
development. No activity associated with the project would disturb the unimproved parkland
areas adjoirting the project site to the west. The project consists of a relatively small
development on a site of approximately 1/2-acre in size. A seven-foot wide planter screening
strip consisting of trees and other vegetation would be provided around the entire periphery of
the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the exception of the southern border which
would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening strip. This would serve to screen the
project from surrounding areas.
40
a
IDSTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
The project site and adjacent sites are not listed or eligible for listing on the New York State
or National Register of Historic Places and are not within a designated or eligible New
York City, New York State, or National Register Historic District. In addition, the project
site and adjacent sites do not contain any architectural or archaeological resources that are
eligible for, or have been designated (or are calenda;red for consideration) as New York
City Landmarks, Interior Landmarks, or Scenic Landmarks.
The NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) has reviewed the proposed action
and has no concerns with the proposed development. The LPC sign-off letter is provided in
the Appendix to this document.
September 2011
6
Landmarks
Preservation
Commission
1 Cent re Street
9th Floor North
New York, NV 10007
Voice (212)-1169-7700
Fax (212}-669-7960
http://nyc.gov/landrnarko
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Project number:
Project:
Address:
Date Received:
DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING / 77DCP054Q
NEW BRD CHNNL VOLUNTEERS FIREHOUSE
B 15304 450, BBL: 4153040450
7/13/2011
[X] No architectural significance
[X] No archaeological significance
[ ] Designated New York City Landmark or Within Designated Historic District
[ ] Listed on National Register of Historic Places
[]Appears to be eligible for National Register Listing and/or New York City
Landmark Designation
[ ] May be archaeologically significant; requesting additional materials
Comments: The LPC is in receipt of an EAS dated July, 2011. There are no historic
or cultural concerns.
7/13/2011
SIGNATURE
Gina Santucci, Environmental Review Coordinator
File Name: 20103_FSO_GS_07132011.doc
42
DATE
NATURAL RESOURCES
The project site consists of an approximately 23,004 square foot vacant parcel,
approximately 5,000 square feet of which is paved with asphalt. The remaining
approximately 18,000 square feet of the site is overgrown with weedy vegetation consisting
of grasses, shrubs, and small trees of less than 2" caliper. The vegetation on the site is
second growth typical of disturbed site conditions. No significant vegetation or habitats are
located on the project site. In addition, the project site is adjoined by a major roadway,
Cross Bay Boulevard, and residential and community facility uses on three sides. All
existing vegetation on the site would be removed to accommodate the proposed
development.
As defined in Section 200 of the Natural Resources section of the CEQR Technical Manual, the
project is substantially devoid of natural resources. As stated above, the project site is partially paved
and the remainder of the site consists of second growth disturbed area vegetation that would not be
considered to be significant. Therefore, the proposed removal of this vegetation would not be
considered to be a significant adverse impact to natural resources.
The project site contains no natural or built resource that is known to contain or may be used as a
habitat by any protected species. In addition, the proposed action would not result in the disruption of
subsurface conditions on the project site, and would therefore not affect the function or value of an
adjacent or nearby natural resource (e.g., Jamaica Bay). With the exception of areas to the west, the
immediately adjacent area is primarily developed with residential and community facility uses and
roadways.
The immediately adjacent area to the west of the project site consists of unimproved
parkland which borders the waters of Jamaica Bay to the south. However, no activity
associated with the project would disturb these areas. The project consists of a relatively
small development on a site of approximately %-acre in size. A seven-foot wide planter
screening strip consisting of trees and other vegetation would be provided around the
entire periphery of the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the exception of the
southern border which would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening strip.
This would serve to screen the project from surrounding areas.
Due to the absence of significant natural resources on the project site and as the proposed action would not disturb natural areas to the west of the property, no adverse impacts to natural resources are anticipated. Further assessment of natural resources is therefore not warranted. September 2011
7
__________IRllilBJnl llJ1NFRASTRUCTURE
Under CEQR, public utilities are examined for their ability to accommodate a proposed
development. Public utilities include water supply, sanitary sewer services, including
Water Pollution Control Plants (WPCP), and storm sewers. The CEQR Technical Manual
indicates that while many projects would not require CEQR analysis with regard to water
supply, wastewater and stormwater conveyance and treatment, certain projects are of a
size, location, and type where the potential for significant adverse impacts to the City's
infrastructure and water quality may exist. Because the City's sewers are sized and
designed based on designated zoning for an area, related population density, and surface
coverage characteristics, projects that greatly increase density, would be located in an area
of concern, or would substantially increase impervious surfaces, merit further analysis for
potential impacts to the City's wastewater and stormwater infrastructure.
Relative to the proposed action, an infrastructure analysis would not be required relative to
water supply as the proposed development would not result in an exceptionally large
demand for water (e.g., those that are projected to use more than one million gallons per
day such as power plants, very large cooling systems, or large developments), and the
project site is not located in an area that experiences low water pressure.
Relative to sanitary sewer services, the proposed firehouse would connect into an existing
10" sanitary sewer fronting the site along Cross Bay Boulevard. The prior EAS prepared for
the proposed project on this site states that "DEP indicated that Broad Channel has
adequate capacity to convey sewage from the relocation of the facility and the anticipated
as-of-right development of the current site." Therefore, no significant adverse impacts to
the City's sanitary sewer system would be expected from the proposed project.
Relative to storm water management, the site currently drains via percolation into the
subsurface of the site and overland flow onto adjoining streets and properties. Storm water
flows resulting from the proposed development will be controlled with an on-site drywell
system to be constructed on the property. One hundred percent of the site's storm water
flows will be detained in this on-site drywell system and no storm water will cross over the
property lines of the adjoining properties or streets. Once detained in the drywells, storm
waters will gradually be released into the subsurface of the site via percolation. The
drywells will be periodically checked and cleaned to assure that they continue to function
properly. Storm water falling on or near the property boundaries of the site will be filtered
by vegetation to be planted along the entire periphery of the property. This vegetative
barrier will consist of a four- to seven-foot wide strip densely planted with trees and
shrubs. No significant adverse impacts to the City's storm water management system
would therefore be expected from the proposed project.
The NYC Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) Bureau of Water and Sewer
Operations (BWSO) will be consulted prior to connection of the proposed facility to water
September 2011
8
sanitary sewer lines and to obtain approval of the proposed storm water control
system.
No infrastructure impacts to water or sewer services are expected from the proposed project, and
further analysis is therefore not warranted.
II AIR QUALITY
Introduction
Under CEQR, two potential types of air quality impacts are examined. These are mobile and
stationary source impacts. Potential mobile source impacts are those which could result from an
increase in traffic in the area, resulting in greater congestion and higher levels of carbon monoxide
(CO). Potential stationary source impacts are those that could occur from stationary sources of air
pollution, such as major industrial processes or heat and hot water boilers of major buildings in close
proximity to a proposed project. Both the potential impacts of a proposed project on surrounding
buildings and potential impacts of uses in the environs of a proposed sensitive use, such as
residences, schools, and hospitals, are considered in the assessment.
Mobile Source
Under guidelines contained in the CEQR Technical Manual, and in this area of New York City,
projects generating fewer than 170 additional vehicular trips in any given hour are considered as
highly unlikely to result in significant mobile source impacts, and do not warrant detailed mobile
source air quality studies. The proposed development would generate fewer than 170 vehicle trips at
any intersection in the study area during any peak hour. Therefore, no detailed mobile source air
quality analysis would be required per the CEQR Technical Manual, and no significant mobile
source air quality impacts would be generated by proposed action
As shown on the Land Use map attached to the EAS, there are no manufacturing uses
within 400 feet of the project site. Development within the 400-foot radius area consists
solely of residential and community facility uses, parking lots, open space, and vacant
undeveloped land.
Stationary Source
A stationary source analysis is required for the proposed action as further discussed below.
A screening analysis was performed, using the methodology described in the CEQR Technical
Manual, to determine if the heat and hot water systems of the proposed BCV building would result
in potential air quality impacts to any other buildings in the vicinity. This methodology determines
the threshold of development size below which the action would not have a significant impact. The
results of this analysis found that there would be no significant air quality impacts from the proposed
project's heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems.
September 2011
9
45
from boiler emissions associated with the proposed commercial development are a function
of fuel type, stack height, minimum distance from the source to the nearest building of similar or
greater height, and square footage of the proposed development. The analysis was based on the
proposed 10,000 square foot community facility building, approximately 35 feet in height, with an
emissions stack height of three feet higher than the building height or 38 feet. The CEQR Technical
Manual Stationary Source Screen graph (17-3) was used for the analysis. The building of similar or
greater height closest to the stack of the proposed building would be the two-story residence located
on the lot to the south of the project site. This residence would be located approximately 103 feet
from the stack of the proposed building on the project site, assuming that the stack would be located
in the center of the roof of the new structure. The attached graph indicates that the plotted point is
below the curve, and therefore, no stationary source impacts would be generated by the project.
Therefore, the potential for significant adverse impacts due to boiler stack emissions from the
proposed project is unlikely, and a detailed analysis of stationary source impacts is not required.
Conclusion
Conditions associated with the project development would not result in any violations of the ambient
air quality standards. Therefore, the action would not result in any potentially significant adverse
stationary or mobile source air quality impacts, and further assessment is not warranted.
September 2011
10
WARNING: These printed materials may be out of date. Please ensure you have the current version that can be found on www.nyc.gov/oec. AIR QUALITY
Ill
Figure 17-3: stationary Sourcti Screen 1,000.000
\00.00<l
J.,i~ --~--.
~-t ·
-(
- ~ -i- ..
- -- -- ---:- ..
+
+-·-··+-- - ·
r1-+-~:-i-+---t.4/,/~'-t-+---+_-_-+--+-_--r_---t-~,-i1--1
I-- ______.
~
'
I
-----+--
I
-- r- -
-:/-:-1--1- --- --- ~ -1--~
I
I
' '
10.000
!
J.--f-+-.....+---+--i-+---+----+-+-+--+-f--'----l--1
!-·t------- ==-t=-..
~--=.- ~- ~= =·-=~
1._
.. --t --t-+-----t--1-t--t-->---+--<
!
--·I----~ --
=-i~:: - --~-1-----t-+-+---+--1---+
.) -- -
\ .000
---1-+---l- --
I-- -
L-
-
-~
I
I
...
t·
I
+---+-~-+--1---+-t--+----+--+-+---+---+-+--t----+-t
Distance to nnrHt bUlldlng (ft)
/03
I
In some cases, it may be possible to pass this screening analysis by restricting the type of fuel that
could be used to supply heat and hot water. As illustrated in the air quality stationary source screen
ing analysis figures in the appendices, No. 4 and No. 6 oils have greater emissions than No. 2 oil or
natural gas. Limiting the fuel used by the proposed project to No. 2 oil or natural gas may eliminate
the potential for significant adverse impacts and the need for further analyses. Based on the fuel type
to be used (natural gas, No. 2, or No. 4 oil), and the type of development (residential or commercial),
the screening figures in the Appendix may be used following steps 1 through 6 above. The project,
CEQR TECHNICAL MANUAL
J7-32
REVISED: MAY
20J0
mNOISE
Introduction
Two types of potential noise impacts are considered under CEQR. These are potential mobile source
and stationary source noise impacts. Mobile source impacts are those which could result from a
proposed project adding a substantial amount of traffic to an area. Potential stationary source noise
impacts are considered when a proposed action would cause a stationary noise source to be operating
within 1,500 feet of a receptor, with a direct line of sight to that receptor, or ifthe project would
include unenclosed mechanical equipment for building ventilation purposes.
Mobile Source
Relative to mobile source impacts, a noise analysis would be required if a proposed project would at
least double existing passenger car equivalent (PCE) traffic volumes along a street on which a
sensitive noise receptor (such as a residence, a park, a school, etc.) is located. Vehicles would
primarily travel to and from the site along Cross Bay Boulevard. Numerous residences are located on
Cross Bay Boulevard in the vicinity of the site, and the effect of project traffic generation on
residences located along this street would therefore be relevant for this assessment.
There would be an increase in vehicular traffic along Cross Bay Boulevard resulting from the
proposed development, but this increment would be a small portion of total traffic volumes.
Significant traffic already travels along Cross Bay Boulevard as this is the sole north-south roadway
traversing Broad Channel. Pursuant to CEQR methodology, no mobile source noise impacts would
be anticipated since traffic volumes would not double along Cross Bay Boulevard due to the
proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a mobile source noise impact
from the traffic volumes that it would generate.
The proposed action would not result in the development of a significant noise generator. All
ambulances associated with the proposed project would be subject to Subchapter 5, §24-241 (b) of
the New York City Noise Control Code, and would be required to produce noise levels no greater
than 90 dBA when measured at a distance of 50 feet. Consequently, no significant adverse impacts
are anticipated.
The proposed emergency ambulance facility would be located adjacent to Cross Bay Boulevard and
approximately 833 feet from an elevated NYC subway line. Due to the proximity of these mobile
source noise generators to the project site, window-wall attenuation is recommended. Per the
findings of the June 2002 EAS prepared for this project, a minimum window-wall attenuation and
alternate means of ventilation is required. Pursuant to current standards, a window-wall attenuation
of 28 dBA will be provided.
Stationary Source
The project would not locate a receptor within 1,500 feet of a substantial stationary source noise
generator, and there is not a substantial stationary source noise generator close to the project site that
is also a sensitive receptor. Additionally, the proposed project would not include any unenclosed
September 2011
11
or ventilation equipment that could adversely impact other sensitive uses in the surrounding
area. Therefore, the project would not have any potentially .adverse stationary source noise impacts.
Conclusion
With the incorporation of the mobile source noise controls and attenuation measures noted above,
the proposed project would not have any potentially significant adverse mobile or stationary source
noise impacts. Therefore, further noise analysis is not warranted.
El CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
A preliminary assessment of construction impacts resulting from the project is required because the
proposed action would result in construction activities along an arterial or major thoroughfare,
as well as disturbance to a site containing natural resources as further discussed below.
Transportation
The project site is located along a major thoroughfare, that being Cross Bay Boulevard.
However, it is not expected that the project's construction activities would require closing,
narrowing, or otherwise impeding moving lanes, roadways, pedestrian elements such as
sidewalks, crosswalks, and corners, parking lanes and/ or parking spaces in on-site or
nearby parking lots and garages, bicycle routes and facilities, bus lanes or routes, or access
points to transit. Even if some limited disturbance were to occur to moving lanes along
Cross Bay Boulevard, the affected area would not be considered to be sensitive to such a
closure, as the surrounding area does not have high pedestrian activity and is not near any
sensitive land uses such as schools or hospitals. In addition, the sidewalks, roadways, and
walkways comprising Cross Bay Boulevard would not be near capacity under the future
No-Action conditions.
An analysis of transportation impacts from construction of the project is also not required
as construction traffic would take place much earlier than the AM and PM traffic peak
hours for Cross Bay Boulevard. In addition, the construction peak would generate fewer
vehicle trips than the operational project peak and the project does not have the potential
for significant adverse traffic impacts during the operational period.
As the project site is currently undeveloped, proposed construction vehicles, equipment,
and supplies would all be stored on the subject property. Two new curb cuts would be
located on Cross Bay Boulevard. No other transportation related disturbances to the
surrounding transportation network are anticipated.
Natural Resources
As defined in Section 200 of the Natural Resources section of the CEQR Technical Manual, the
project is substantially devoid of natural resources. The project site consists of an approximately
23,004 square foot vacant parcel, approximately 5,000 square feet of which is paved with asphalt.
September 2011
12 ---------~-IMMllfll The remaining approximately 18,000 square feet of the site is overgrown with weedy vegetation
consisting of grasses, shrubs, and small trees of less than 2" caliper that would not be considered to
be significant. The vegetation on the site is second growth typical of disturbed site conditions. No
significant vegetation or habitats are located on the project site. In addition, the project site is
adjoined by a major roadway, Cross Bay Boulevard, and residential and community facility uses on
three sides. Therefore, the proposed removal ofthis vegetation would not be considered to be a
significant adverse impact to natural resources.
The project site contains no natural or built resource that is known to contain or may be used as a
habitat by any protected species. In addition, the proposed action would not result in the disruption of
subsurface conditions on the project site, and would therefore not affect the function or value of an
adjacent or nearby natural resource (e.g., Jamaica Bay). With the exception of areas to the west, the
immediately adjacent area is primarily developed with residential and community facility uses and
roadways.
The immediately adjacent area to the west of the project site consists of unimproved
parkland which borders the waters of Jamaica Bay to the south. However, no activity
associated with the project would disturb these areas. The project consists of a relatively
small development on a site of approximately Y2-acre in size. A seven-foot wide planter
screening strip consisting of trees and other vegetation would be provided around the
entire periphery of the site (except for the driveway curb cuts) with the exception of the
southern border which would be provided with a four-foot wide planter screening strip.
This would serve to screen the project from surrounding areas.
The proposed action would not result in any significant adverse construction impacts due
to the absence of significant natural resources on the project site and as the proposed action
would not disturb natural areas to the west of the property. Further assessment of
construction impacts is therefore not warranted.
September 2011
13 Environmental Assessment
DocumentB:
8StepProcessCheckList
Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps. PW # 4306 FEMA 4085-DR-NY Executive Order 11988 – FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Executive Order 11990 – WETLAND PROTECTION 8-STEP PROCESS CHECKLIST
Date: 08/11/2015
Prepared By: Aaron Clark, Floodplain Specialist
Project:
The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps., the applicant, seeks
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, the Agency) Public Assistance federal grant
funds to relocate a hurricane damaged facility, buildings, and appurtenances throughout the area
serviced under their authority. The proposed actions: SOW; The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire
Department and Ambulance Corps., Queens County, Category “E” work includes relocation of
the destroyed building elements, (plumbing, electrical panel, boiler, and emergency generator);
appliances, (response gear washer and dryer and emergency generator); and contents (office
equipment and supplies, communication systems and equipment, shop tools, and hand tools) to a
new location within the Broad Channel community.
This project must be conducted in accordance with conditions for federal actions in the
floodplain as set forth in presidential Executive Order 11988, Floodplains and presidential
Executive Order 11990, Wetlands and the implementing regulation found at 44 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) Part 9, Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetland. These
regulations apply to all Agency actions which have the potential to affect floodplains or wetlands
or their occupants, or which are subject to potential harm by location in floodplains or wetlands.
Additionally, all Public Assistance grant funded projects carried out in the floodplain or affecting
the floodplain must be coordinated with the local floodplain administrator for floodplain
development permit and the action must be undertaken in compliance with relevant, applicable
and required local codes and standards and thereby, will reduce the risk of future flood loss,
minimize the impacts of floods on safety, health, and welfare, and preserve and possibly restore
beneficial floodplain values as required by Executive Order 11988.
52
Relocation replacement projects conducted with Public Assistance grant funds must be carried out in accordance with the local floodplain management plan and ordinance and shall utilize the current Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Community 360497 dated 12/05/2013, “as best available data” as a minimum standard. Exceptions to this requirement shall be reported to the New York State Office of Emergency Management (NYSOEM), FEMA Environmental, and the local floodplain administrator before undertaking the action. Site 1) The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps. , Fire Hall, Brief description of work The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps., intends to repair the existing structure located at 15 Noel Road, Broad Channel, Queens County, New York. Site 2) The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps. , Fire Hall, Brief description of work The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps., intends to relocate and replace the Fire Hall back to pre-disaster condition with codes and standards changes at 305Cross Bay Blvd., Broad Channel, Queens County, New York. The project entail replacement to the destroyed building elements including elevation to codes and standards, (plumbing, electrical panel, boiler, and emergency generator); appliances, (response gear washer and dryer and emergency generator); and contents (office equipment and supplies, communication systems and equipment, shop tools, and hand tools).
STEP 1 - Determine whether the proposed actions are located in a wetland and or the 100year floodplain (500-year floodplain for critical action [44CFR 9.4], or whether they have
the potential to affect or be affected by a floodplain or a wetland (see 44 CFR9.7).
__X__ The project site is located in relation to the floodplains as mapped by:
Site 1) The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps. 15 Noel Road,
Broad Channel, Queens County, New York.
PRELIMINARY FIRM: 3604970377G, 12/05/2013
Special Flood Hazard Area: < Zone AE Base Flood Elevation (10 feet) NAVD88 datum>
Note Elevation listed for a Critical Action 500 year Base Flood Elevation
Latitude 40.60785 / Longitude -73.81834
53
Site 2) The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps. 305Cross Bay
Blvd., Broad Channel, Queens County, New York.
PRELIMINARY FIRM: 3604970377G, 12/05/2013
Special Flood Hazard Area: < Zone AE Base Flood Elevation (10 feet) NAVD88 datum>
Note Elevation listed for a Critical Action 500 year Base Flood Elevation
Latitude 40.613525 / Longitude -73.820717
_____ The Project is located in the wetland as identified by:
A review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory 08/11/2015 indicates the
proposed project location is not located in a mapped wetland or U.S. waters and will not likely
adversely affect wetlands.
STEP 2 - Notify the public at the earliest possible time of the intent to carry out an action
in a floodplain or wetland, and involve the affected and interested public in the decision
making process (see 44CFR 9.8).
_____ Not applicable - Project is not located in a floodplain or wetland.
__X__ Applicable - Notice will be or has been provided by:
A Cumulative Initial Public Notice was published in the New York Post 12/14/2012. Additional
public notice may be provided upon finalization of the preliminary The Broad Channel
Volunteer Fire Department and Ambulance Corps., work plans.
STEP 3 - Identify and evaluate practicable alternatives to locating the proposed action in
a floodplain or wetland (including alternative sites, actions, and the “No Action” option)
[see 44 CFR 9.9]. If practicable alternative exists outside of the floodplain or wetland,
FEMA must locate the action at the alternative site.
_____
Not applicable – Project is not located in a floodplain or in a wetland.
_____ Applicable – Alternative identified in the EA Document or as described below:
Alternative 1: No Action - No action would leave the community without the function of the
damaged facilities. Additionally, this would leave the damaged facilities and their environs in an
unsafe condition, which would represent a safety hazard to the public and nearby properties.
54
Alternative 2: Relocation outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area –Relocating the facility
requires the abandonment of the provision of critical emergency protective measures that are
essential to save lives, and protect property and public health and safety in the proximity to the
communities served, i.e.’ the local “neighborhood”, which does not meet the purpose of the
action. As the facilities have health and safety significance and acceptable practicable alternative
outside the floodplain has not been identified by the grantee or sub-grantee that allows the
section of the relocation alternative.
Alternative 3: Proposed Action Relocation and replacement in the currently proposed new location with mitigation (all steps
necessary to minimize the potential adverse effects of the proposed action) – The proposed
project is for relocation / restoration of a facility, including applicable codes and standards and
conditions to comply with requirements of EO 11988 and the implementing regulations at 44
CFR Part 9.
The executive order allows for locating these actions in the floodplain because the impacts of the
action can be minimized and the importance of the action clearly outweighs other Executive
Order requirements.
Relocation / restoration of the damaged facilities at the currently proposed new location is a
practicable option because it has been selected by The Broad Channel Volunteer Fire
Department and Ambulance Corps., as a viable alternative that is economically feasible, socially
acceptable, and has been determined by the community leaders to serve the best interests of the
entire community.
STEP 4 - Identify the full range or potential direct or indirect impacts associated with, the
occupancy or modification of floodplains and wetlands and the potential direct and indirect
support of floodplain and wetland development that could result from the proposed action
(see CFR 449.10)
_____
__X__ Applicable – Alternative identified in the EA Document or as described below:
Alternative 3: Proposed Action – Relocation / restoration at the current proposed new location
results in the mitigation / restoration of the damaged buildings and eliminates the hazards of
unrepaired facilities. The action requires significantly less resource and initiative than relocation
outside the special flood hazard area and has been selected as a practicable alternative by those
representing the community served.
55
A review of the natural environment, social concerns, and the economic aspects of the proposed
project indicates that replacement of the facilities in their new proposed and desired location is a
practicable alternative and that no practicable alternative has been identified outside of the
special flood hazard area.
STEP 5 - Minimize the potential adverse impacts and support to or within floodplains and
wetlands to be identified under Step # 4, restore and preserve the natural and beneficial
values served by floodplains, and preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values
served by wetlands ( see 44 CFR 9.11).
_____
__X__ Applicable – Mitigation measures identified in the EA Document or as described
below:
Alternative 3: Relocation / Replacement shall be in accordance with local floodplain ordinances
with applicable codes and standards applied to mitigate and minimize adverse effects.
STEP 6 - Re-evaluate the proposed action to determine first, if it’s still practicable in light
of its exposure to flood hazards, the extent to which it will aggravate the hazards to others
and its potential to disrupt floodplain and wetland values and second, if alternatives
preliminarily rejected at Step #3 are practicable in light of the information gained in Steps
#4 and #5. FEMA shall not act in a floodplain or wetland unless it’s the only practicable
location.
_____
__X__ Applicable – Action proposed is located in the only practicable location as described
below:
The proposed action is the chosen practicable alternative based upon a review of possible
adverse effects on the floodplain and community / socioeconomic expectations.
STEP 7 - Prepare and provide the public with a finding and public explanation of any
final decision that the floodplain or wetland is the only practicable alternative (see 44 CFR
9.12).
_____
56
__X__ Applicable – Finding is or will be prepared as described below:
An initial Cumulative Public Notice was published on 12/14/2012. For routine activities, this
will be the only public notice provided. Other activities and those involving facilities that do not
meet the four criteria are required to undergo more detailed review, including study of alternate
locations. Subsequent public notices regarding such projects will be published if necessary, as
more specific information becomes available.
STEP 8 - Review the implementation and post-implementation phases of the proposed
action to ensure the requirements of the Order are fully implemented. Oversight
responsibility shall be integrated into the existing process.
_____
__X__ Applicable – Approval is conditioned on review of implementation and postimplementation phases to ensure compliance with the order(s).
Review the implementation and post-implementation phase of the proposed action to ensure that
the requirement(s) stated in 44 CFR 9.11 are fully implemented.
__X___ Applicable – Oversight responsibility shall be integrated into existing processes and
project completion in accordance with all applicable floodplain ordinances and codes and
standards shall be verified at project end.
57
AppendixB:Figures
58
FigureA:
Proposed Project Location Map
Figure A: Proposed Project Location Map 60
FigureB:
Proposed Project Location Aerial View
Figure B: Proposed Project Location Aerial View Environmental Assessment
FigureC:
Proposed Elevation Diagram
JOHN D. CALCAGNILE
ARCHITECT
I
==1
*''6 0'!05~ '11YkVO
1"1Q'#¥11)9(,\C)\lol'l'.HH4
""""'
"~·
FRONT ELEVATION
~
6 Ul!.DIN5 El.EVATIONS
SIDE ELEVATION
•1"1'.HAVENU~
"~-000::
""""
'HrT: ~ rs
:?
64
FigureD:
Wetlands
65
e tla nds
II Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
0 Estuarine and Marine Wetland
0 FreshV1ater Emergent Wetland
Ill Freshv..ater Forested/ Shrub Wetland
0 Freshwater Pond
II Lake
0 Other
Ill Riverine
FigureE:
FIRMETTE
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
FIRMETTE
APPLICANT:
FIPS NO.
Broad Channel VFD & Ambulance Corp
CATEGORY:
PW
081-U9YG7-00
National PW Template V2.6 June 2012 Excel 2007/2010
68
E
1956
FigureF:
CoastalBarrierResourceSystem
69
FWS CBRA Mapper
Page 1 of 1 otherwise Protected Area
DSystem Unit
CBRS Buffer Zone
~ CBRS Buffer Zone
http://wim.usgs.gov/cbramapper/cbramapper.html
6/16/2015
AppendixC:Correspondences
CorrespondenceA:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FRI 13:08
1210 02/ 004
FAX
United States Department of the Inter ior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE N<?w York field Office
Long Island Fich.l Ofllcc
'.!817 Luker Road, Conla11d, NY 13045
J40 Smilh ROMI, Slurtcy. NY 11967
Pllooe: (607} 753-9334
Fax: (607) 753-%99
Phone: (6J I} 286-0485
fax: (631) 286-4003
E ndangered Species Act List Request Response Cover Sheet
T his cover sheet is provided in response to a search of our website* for information regarding the
potential presence of species under jurisdiction of the U.S. F ish and Wild life Service (Service) with in a
proposed project area.
Attached is a copy of the New York State County List ofThreatcned, Endangered, and Candidate
Species for the appropriate county(ies). The database that we use to 1·espond to list requests was
developed primarily to ass ist Federal agencies that are consulting with us under Section 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 e1 seq.). Our lists include all
Federally-listed, proposed, and candidate species known to occur, as well as those likely to occur, in
specific counties.
The attached information is designed to assist project sponsors or applicants through the process of
determining whether a Federally- liste~ proposed, or candidate species and/or "critical habitat" may
occur within their proposed project area and when it is appropriate to contact our offices for additional
coordination or consultation. You may be aware that our offices have provided much ofthis
information in the past in project-specific letters. However, due to increasing project review workloads
and decreasing staff, we are now providing as much information as possible through our website. We
encourage anyone requesting species list information to print out all materials used in any analyses of
effects on listed, proposed, or cand idate species.
T he Se1·vice routinely updates this database as species are proposed, listed, and de listed, or as we obtain
new bio logical info1·mation or specific presence/absence information fo r listed species. If project
proponents coordinate w ith the Service to address proposed and candidate species in early stages of
planning, this should not be a problem if these species are eventually llsted. However, we recommend
that both project proponents and reviewing agencies retrieve from our on line database an updated list
every 90 days to append to this document to ensure that listed species presence/absence information for
Che proposed project is currenl.
R eminder: Section 9 of the ESA prohibits unauthorized taking•• of listed species and applies to
Federal and non~fcderal activities. For projects not authorized, funded, or carried out by a Federal
agency, consultation with the Service pursuant to Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA is not required. However,
no person is authorized to "take*"'" any listed species w ithout appropriate authorizations from the
Service. Therefore, we provide technical assistance to individuals and agencies to assist with project
plannjng to avoid the potential for "take**," or when appropriate, to provide assistance with their
application for an incidental take pennit pursuant to Section IO(a)( l )(B) of the ESA.
08/03/2012 FRI 13:09
1210 03/ 004
FAX
Additionally, endangered species and their habitats are protected by Section 7(a)(2) ofthe F..SA, which
requires Federal agencies, in consultation with the Service, to ensure that any action it authorizess funds,
or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the
destrnction or adverse modification of critical habitat. An assessment of the potential direct, indirect,
and cumulative impacts is required for alJ Federal actions that may affect listed species.
For instance, work in certain waters of the United States, including wetlands and streams, may require a
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). If a permit is req\.1ired) in reviewing the
application pursuant to the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amende<l;l6 U.S.C. 661
et seq.), the Service may concur, with or without recommending additional permit conditions, or
recommend denial of the pel'mit depending upon potential adverse impacts on fish and wildlife resources
associated with project construction or implementation. The need for a Corps permit may be determined
by contacting the appropriate Corps office(s).*
For additional information on fish and wildlife resources or Statcwlistcd species, we suggest contacting the appropriate New York State Department of Environmental Conservation regional office(s) and the New York Natural Heritage Program In formation Services.* Since wetlands, ponds, streams, or open or sheltered coastal waters may be present in the project area, it
may be helpful to utilize the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps as an initial screening tool.
However, they may or may not be available for the project area. Please note that while the NWf maps
are reasonably accurate, they should not be used in lieu of field surveys for determining the presence of
wetlands or delineating wetland boundaries for Federal regulatory purposes. Online information on the
NWI prngram and digital data can be downloaded from Wetlands Mapper>
http://wetlands.fws.gov/mapper_tool.htm.
Project construction 01' implementation should not commence until all requirements of the ESA have
been fulfilled. After reviewing our website and following the steps outlined, we encourage both project
proponents and reviewing agencies to contact our office to determine whether an accurate determination
of species impacts has been made. lfthere are any questions about our county lists or agency or project
proponent responsibilities under the ESJ\, please contact the New York or Long Island Field Office
Endangered Species Program at the numbers listed above.
Attachment (county list of species)
*Additional information referred to above may be found on our website at:
http://www.fws.gov/northcast/nyfo/es/section7.htm
'* * Under the Ac! and regulations, it is illegal for any person Sllbject lo lhejudsdiction-Ofthc United States lo fake (includes harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wonnd, kill, trap, copturc, or oollect; or to altcmp! any of these), import or ex1>ort, ship in interstate or foreign
commerce in the course of commercial activity, or sell or offer for sale in intarstaLa or foreign commcm: any endungeNd fish or wildlife
species and most lhrealcne<l fish and wildlife species. lt is also illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry, transpo1·t, or ship any such wildlife lhaL
has been taken illegally. "Hann" includes any acl which actually kills or injures fish or wi!<llifc, and case Jaw has clarified \hat such acls
may include significant habitat modification or <legradntion that significantly impairs essential behavioral 1lattc1·ns of fish or wildlife.
74
08/03/2012 FRI 13: 09
121004/004
FAX
Page 1 of I
Queens County
U.S.
FISH & WILDLIFI<~
SERVIL"E
Queens County Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species and Candidate Species This list represents the best available information regarding known or likely County occurrences of Federally
listed and candidate species and is subject to change as new information becomes available.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Piping plover
Charadrius melodus
T
Roseate tern
Sterna dougal!ii dougallii
E
Seabeach amaranth
Amaranthus pumilus
T
Status Codes: E=Endangered, T=Threatened, P=Proposed, C=Candidate, D=Delisted.
Information current as of: 8/3/2012
http://www. f ws. gov /northeast/ny fa/es/County Lists/QucensDec2006 .htm
8131201:
CorrespondenceB:
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
76
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Environmental Permits, Region 2 Office 9
47-40 21 r street, Long Island City, NY 11101-5407
Phone: (718) 482-4997 • FAX: (718) 482-4975 Website: www.dec.state.ny.us
1
f\\al c0~ , m
~ ~ ~ ~ ·-'7
~
OJ
....
:.:;o
YE:ARS
John P. Cahill Commissioner August 10, 2000
Timothy B. Keenan, Chief of Deprtment Broad Channel Volunteers, Inc. Fire & Ambulance Corps 15 Noel Road Broad Channel, NY 11693 'I
Re: DEC Wetlands Jurisdictional Determination No. 63-5259 Queens County Tax Block: 15304, Lot: 450, Cross Bay Blvd., Broad Channel Dear Mr. Keenan:
The property referenced above is not within the jurisdiction of DEC under the
Freshwater Wetlands Act (Article 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law) or the
Tidal Wetlands Act (Article 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law). Therefore, a
-DEC tidal wetlands or freshwater wetlands permit is not required to alter or develop
this property and the surrounding streets.
If you have further questions, please call this office at the above telephone
number.
Very truly yours,
JFC:HJD
cc: NYC Dept. of Buildings, Queens Borough Office
77
CorrespondenceC:
State of New York Department of State
78
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
FEMA-4085-DR-NY
Sandy Recovery Field Office, Forest Hills Tower
118-35 Queens Blvd., 6th Floor
Forest Hills, NY 11375
August 20, 2015
Mr. Jeffrey Zappieri,
Consistency Review, New York Coastal Management Program
New York Department of State
99 Washington Avenue, Suite 1010
Albany, New York 12231-0001
Re: State’s Coastal Management Program Consistency Review of FEMA-4085-DR-NY Super
Storm Sandy: Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Relocation
Dear Mr. Zappieri:
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is proposing to provide federal funding
from its Public Assistance (PA) Program to assist the Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department
(Applicant) with the relocation of the fire station. The Applicant’s damaged two-story facility
(1,572 SF) is currently located at 15 Noel Road, Broad Channel, New York (GPS: 40.607939,
73.818423; Figure 1). The applicant intends to construct a new two-story 10,000 SF fire station
at 305 Cross Bay Boulevard (GPS: 40.613283, -73.820785; Figure 2), which is approximately
0.5 mile north of their current facility. The ground floor of the proposed fire station would house
the facility's emergency vehicles (two fire trucks, two ambulances, and a boat) and the second
floor would consist of sleeping quarters, a bathroom, a kitchen, meeting room, and a full
telecommunications center that could be used by New York Office of Emergency Management
and other agencies during an emergency event. The new facility would be constructed to the
latest New York City Department of Buildings and FEMA Flood Elevations, therefore mitigating
potential damages from future events.
New York State Coastal Policies 1 through 44 have been reviewed with respect to the proposed
mitigation measure to be performed per FEMA’s disaster recovery operations. Based on this
review, FEMA has determined that the above referenced proposed activities are consistent with
the policies of the New York State Coastal Management Program (CMP) and will not hinder the
achievement of those policies. A summary of the proposed project’s consistency with the State
Coastal Policies is included as an attachment.
FEMA is seeking the New York Department of State’s (NYDOS) concurrence with FEMA’s
Coastal Zone Consistency Determination, in accordance with the requirement of the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972 (15 CFR Part 930), prior to the release of federal funding to the
grant recipient.
79
FEMA Environmental Historic Preservation (EHP) looks forward to your office’s feedback
within 60 days of receipt of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 286
1627 or at [email protected].
Sincerely,
John Dawson
EHP, Branch Director
New York Sandy Recovery Field Office/4085-DR-NY
Desk (no voice mail): (718) 575-7289
Cell: (202) 286-1627
JD/tf
Encl: Location Maps
Consistencies with Coastal Policies of New York Worksheet
80
ATTACHMENTS
81
Figure 1: Location Map: Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department Current Location
82
Figure 2: Location Map: Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department New Location
83
Summary Table for Project’s Consistency with Coastal Policies of New York State
Policy 1
Restore, revitalize, and redevelop deteriorated and underutilized waterfront areas for
commercial, industrial, cultural, recreational, and other compatible uses.
Consistent. Proposal will redevelop a vacant commercial property owned by the fire
department for the purpose of relocating and constructing a new fire station on higher ground
to minimize significant damages from future storm events.
Policy 2
Facilitate the siting of water-dependent uses and facilities on or adjacent to coastal waters.
N/A. Proposal does not affect positively or negatively the siting of water-dependent uses and
facilities.
Policy 3
Further develop the state's major ports of Albany, Buffalo, New York, Ogdensburg, and
Oswego as centers of commerce and industry, and encourage the siting, in these port
areas, including those under the jurisdiction of state public authorities, of land use and
development which is essential to, or in support of, the waterborne transportation of cargo
and people.
N/A. Proposal is not under a port authority nor interferes with port authority land-uses.
Policy 4
Strengthen the economic base of smaller harbor areas by encouraging the development
and enhancement of those traditional uses and activities which have provided such areas
with their unique maritime identity.
N/A. Proposal does not affect positively or negatively the economic base of surrounding waterdependent facilities since the adopted land use and/or zoning code dictates the degree of
development that can occur within the area.
Policy 5
Encourage the location of development in areas where public services and facilities
essential to such development are adequate.
Consistent. Proposal will relocate the facility onto higher ground, as well as increasing the
resiliency of the facility and maintaining productivity of the existing provided services. The
project facility functions as a public service and is within a densely populated residential area.
Policy 6
Expedite permit procedures in order to facilitate the siting of development activities at
suitable locations.
FEMA will provide a 60-day consistency determination review period to the NYSDOS Coastal
Management Program before processing the federal disaster relief grant specifically for
declaration of NY-4085.
84
Policy 7
Significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats will be protected, preserved, and where
practical, restored so as to maintain their viability as habitats.
Consistent. Proposal’s construction impacts will be limited to the project site (i.e., within
previously disturbed areas) thus, no expected negative impacts to SCFWHs have been
identified. Viable SCFWHs will also be protected indirectly by complying with permit
requirements prescribed for protecting state’s natural resources.
Policy 8
Protect fish and wildlife resources in the coastal area from the introduction of hazardous
wastes and other pollutants which bio-accumulate in the food chain or which cause
significant sub lethal or lethal effect on those resources.
Consistent. Proposal will not introduce hazardous wastes or other pollutants into the nearby
aquatic ecosystem based on the lack of a connection between site location and the aquatic
environ. Thus, it is anticipated that activities are not likely to adversely impact environmentally
sensitive vegetation, soils, and/or animal resources.
Policy 9
Expand recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in coastal areas by increasing access
to existing resources, supplementing existing stocks, and developing new resources.
N/A. Proposal does not include expansion of recreational use of fish and wildlife resources in
coastal areas since it is not located directly adjacent to the waterfront.
Policy 10
Further develop commercial finfish, shellfish, and crustacean resources in the coastal area
by encouraging the construction of new, or improvement of existing on-shore commercial
fishing facilities, increasing marketing of the state's seafood, maintaining adequate stocks,
and expanding aquaculture facilities.
N/A. Policy is not applicable since the stated purpose of the facility does not involve
commercial fishing resources.
Policy 11
Buildings and other structures will be sited in the coastal area so as to minimize damage to
property and the endangering of human lives caused by flooding and erosion.
Consistent. Construction designs will be implemented per advisory base flood elevations and
following floodplain administrator requirements.
85
Policy 12
Activities or development in the coastal area will be undertaken so as to minimize damage
to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural
protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands and bluffs.
Consistent. Proposal is sited to avoid encroaching upon any area of potential effect.
Construction activities will occur within disturbed and/or improved properties and will follow
best management practices listed in federal/NYSDEC permits for minimizing erosional/flooding
damages to surrounding natural resources.
Policy 13
The construction or reconstruction of erosion protection structures shall be undertaken
only if they have a reasonable probability of controlling erosion for at least thirty years as
demonstrated in design and construction standards and/or assured maintenance or
replacement programs.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose, since it does not include the construction or
reconstruction of erosion protection structures.
Policy 14
Activities and development, including the construction or reconstruction of erosion
protection structures, shall be undertaken so that there will be no measurable increase in
erosion or flooding at the site of such activities or development, or at other locations.
Consistent. Proposal is not anticipated to increase erosion/flooding since work activities will
follow best management practices and are designed to lessen flood risks.
Policy 15
Mining, excavation or dredging in coastal waters shall not significantly interfere with the
natural coastal processes which supply beach materials to land adjacent to such waters
and shall be undertaken in a manner which will not cause an increase in erosion of such
land.
N/A. No dredging and/or filling activities in coastal waters have been identified for this
proposal.
Policy 16
Public funds shall only be used for erosion protective structures where necessary to
protect human life, and new development which requires a location within or adjacent to
an erosion hazard area to be able to function, or existing development; and only where the
public benefits outweigh the long term monetary and other costs including the potential
for increasing erosion and adverse effects on natural protective features.
Consistent. FEMA's environmental analysis of disaster assistance grants will include these
factors.
86
Policy 17
Non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from
flooding and erosion shall be used whenever possible.
Consistent. Erosion control measures will be used during construction to minimize run-off into
local surface waters and/or nearby properties.
Policy 18
To safeguard the vital economic, social and environmental interests of the state and of its
citizens, proposed major actions in the coastal area must give full consideration to those
interests, and to the safeguards which the state has established to protect valuable coastal
resource areas.
Consistent. Proposal will protect the economic and social interests of the state and its citizens.
All work will be done using construction best management practices per federal/state permit
requirements.
Policy 19
Protect, maintain, and increase the level and types of access to public water-related
recreation resources and facilities.
N/A. Project will have no influence on access to public water-related recreation resources and
facilities since it is not located adjacent to the waterfront.
Policy 20
Access to the publicly-owned foreshore and to lands immediately adjacent to the foreshore
or the water's edge that are publicly-owned shall be provided and it shall be provided in a
manner compatible with adjoining uses.
N/A. Project does not have access to the foreshore nor to lands immediately adjacent to the
water’s edge.
Policy 21
Water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation will be encouraged and facilitated, and
will be given priority over non-water-related used along the coast.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose since it does not affect positively or negatively the
siting of water-dependent and water-enhanced uses and facilities,
Policy 22
Development, when located adjacent to the shore, will provide for water-related
recreation, whenever such use is compatible with reasonably anticipated demand for such
activities, and is compatible with the primary purpose of the development.
N/A. Proposal does not include development adjacent to the shore.
87
Policy 23
Protect, enhance and restore structures, districts, areas or sites that are of significance in
the history, architecture, archaeology or culture of the state, its communities, or the
nation.
Consistent. FEMA will be consulting with the State Historic Preservation Office and
Participating Tribes per Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act to address any
proposed ground disturbing activities as identified in submitted project plans. Any identified
adverse effect(s) for standing structures will be mitigated through the Abbreviated Consultation
process outlined in the New York Programmatic Agreement.
Policy 24
Prevent impairment of scenic resources of statewide significance.
Consistent. Proposal will not impact known scenic resources of statewide significance.
Policy 25
Protect, restore or enhance natural and man-made resources which are not identified as
being of statewide significance, but which contribute to the overall scenic quality of the
coastal area.
Consistent. The purpose of the proposal is to protect improved public property and minimize
damages to man-made coastal resources and/or beneficial uses.
Policy 26
Conserve and protect agricultural lands in the state's coastal area.
N/A. No agricultural land is present in the vicinity of the proposal.
Policy 27
Decisions on the siting and construction of major energy facilities in the coastal area will
be based on public energy needs, compatibility of such facilities with the environment, and
the facility's need for a shorefront location.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose since it does not involve siting and construction of
energy facilities.
Policy 28
Ice management practices shall not interfere with the production of hydroelectric power,
damage significant fish and wildlife and their habitats, or increase shoreline erosion or
flooding.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose since ice management practices are not involved in
construction activities.
88
Policy 29
Encourage the development of energy resources on the outer continental shelf, in Lake
Erie and in other water bodies, and ensure the environmental safety of such activities.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose since project activities do not include development of
energy resources.
Policy 30
Municipal, industrial, and commercial discharge of pollutants, including but not limited
to, toxic and hazardous substances, into coastal waters will conform to state and national
water quality standards.
Consistent. The proposal will continue to conform to all appropriate state and federal permit
conditions.
Policy 31
State coastal area policies and management objectives of approved local waterfront
revitalization programs will be considered while reviewing coastal water classifications
and while modifying water quality standards; however, those waters already
overburdened with contaminants will be recognized as being a development constraint.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal’s purpose since project does not involve review of or
modification to the state's adopted coastal water classifications or water quality standards.
Policy 32
Encourage the use of alternative or innovative sanitary waste systems in small
communities where the costs of conventional facilities are unreasonably high, given the
size of the existing tax base of these communities.
N/A. This policy is not applicable to the project location, which is currently served by an
existing public sewer system.
Policy 33
Best management practices will be used to ensure the control of storm water runoff and
combined sewer overflows draining into coastal waters.
Consistent. Best management practices, such as erosion control measures, will be used to
control storm water runoff from entering into nearby/adjacent surface waters and abutting
properties.
Policy 34
Discharge of waste materials into coastal waters from vessels subject to state jurisdiction
will be limited so as to protect significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreational areas and
water supply areas.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal’s purpose since this project will have no impact on vessel
discharges.
89
Policy 35
Dredging and filling in coastal waters and disposal of dredged material will be undertaken
in a manner that meets existing State permit requirements, and protects significant fish
and wildlife habitats, scenic resources, natural protective features, important agricultural
lands, and wetlands.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose since the project does not involve dredging and filling
in coastal waters, nor disposal of dredged material.
Policy 36
Activities related to the shipment and storage of petroleum and other hazardous materials
will be conducted in a manner that will prevent or at least minimize spills into coastal
waters; all practicable efforts will be undertaken to expedite the cleanup of such
discharges; and restitution for damages will be required when these spills occur.
Consistent. Best management practices will be utilized for any shipment and storage of
petroleum and/or other hazardous materials.
Policy 37
Best management practices will be utilized to minimize the non-point discharge of excess
nutrients, organics and eroded soils into coastal waters.
Consistent. Best management practices will be utilized during construction of the project to
reduce the potential discharge of soils into coastal waters. When the project is completed, no
changes to the nature, amount, or location of the discharge of stormwater from the project
locations are anticipated.
Policy 38
The quality and quantity of surface water and groundwater supplies will be conserved and
protected, particularly where such waters constitute the primary or sole source of water
supply.
Consistent. The proposal will have minimal impact on the quality or quantity of surface or
groundwater supplies and will comply with any federal/state permits required to connect to
existing infrastructure.
Policy 39
The transport, storage, treatment and disposal of solid wastes, particularly hazardous
wastes, within coastal areas will be conducted in such a manner so as to protect
groundwater and surface water supplies, significant fish and wildlife habitats, recreation
areas, important agricultural land, and scenic resources.
Consistent. Proposal will use best management practices listed in federal/NYSDEC permits for
transport, storage, treatment and disposal of all C&D, hazardous waste, etc. during the
installation of the generators, and construction and elevation of the annexes and boiler
buildings. There will be no adverse impacts on fish and wildlife resources, groundwater supply,
recreation areas, scenic resources or agricultural land.
90
Policy 40
Effluent discharged from major steam electric generating and industrial facilities into
coastal waters will not be unduly injurious to fish and wildlife and shall conform to state
water quality standards.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose or function since the facility is not a steam electric
generating or industrial facility.
Policy 41
Land use or development in the coastal area will not cause national or state air quality
standards to be violated.
Consistent. Proposal will not impact state or national air quality standards.
Policy 42
Coastal management policies will be considered if the state reclassifies land areas
pursuant to the prevention of significant deterioration regulations of the federal clean air
act.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose or function as it does not propose reclassifying land
areas pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act.
Policy 43
Land use or development in the coastal area must not cause the generation of significant
amounts of acid rain precursors: nitrates and sulfates.
Consistent. Proposal is not anticipated to cause acid rain precursors.
Policy 44
Preserve and protect tidal and freshwater wetlands and preserve the benefits derived from
these areas.
N/A. Policy is not the proposal's purpose or function since it is not located in or adjacent to a
tidal or freshwater wetland.
91
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ON~ _CO]'v1ME_R9_E Plt.~A
ANDREW M. CUOMO
-
99 WASHINGTON AVENUE
ALBANY, NY 12231-0001
CESAR A. PERALES
WWW.DOS.NY.GOV
SECRETARY OF STATE
August 21, 2015
Ms. Terri Fish, EHP .Specialist
Sandy Recovery Field Office
118-35 Queens Boulevard, 5th Floor
Forest Hills, New York 11375
Re:
F-2015-0630(FA)
FEMA-Broad Channel Volunteer Fire Department
Construct a new two-story rn;umrsF-fire stati-on-.- - - - - -
City of New York, Borough of Queens, Queens County
General Concurrence - No Objection to Funding
Dear Ms. Fish:
The Department of State received the information you submitted regarding the above matter on 8/20/2015.
The Department of State has determined that this proposal meets the Department's general consistency
concurrence criteria. Therefore, the Department of State has no objection to the use of FEMA funds for this
fo~ancial assistance activity. This concurrence pertains to the financial assistance activity for this project only.
If federal permits or other form of federal agency authorization is required for this activity, the Department of
State will conduct a separate review for those permit activities. In such a case, please forward a copy of the
federal application for authorization, a completed Federal Consistency Assessment Form, and all supporting
information to the Department at the same time it is submitted to the federal agency from which the necessary
authorization is requested.
When communicating with us regarding this matter, please contact Jeffrey Zappieri at (518) 474-6000 and refer
to our file #F-2015-0630(FA).
Sincerely,
'(J~'ljJ
Jeffrey Zappieri
Supervisor, Consistency Review Unit
Office of Planning and Development
- -- -j:Z/dc
.
--------------------
---··
-~---··
-·-
NEWYORI<
S'fA'fEOF
OPPORTUNITY.
Department
of State
92

APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Documents Document A – New York

Transcription

Similar documents

Yachtoberfest2015 - Green Bay Yachting Club

www.hotondo.com.au Major sponsor Hotondo Homes Batemans

Ride Flyer

Coastal Highway from Tmn Perling to Horizon Hills is Opened!

Blackman Plumbing Supply`s new Bay Shore, NY branch is now open!

taco tuesdays - Delta Sun Times

Print PDF - James Sarles Realty

Desolation Sound Marine Provincial Park

The Verandahs of Brighton Bay - V

Jobs-Housing Fit in the Bay Area