EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 INTRODUCTION

Document Sample
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.1 INTRODUCTION Powered By Docstoc
					MTA New York City Transit                                   Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1           INTRODUCTION
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority
(MTA), MTA Capital Construction (MTACC) and New York City Transit (NYCT), proposes the
construction and operation of the Fulton Street Transit Center (FSTC) to improve access to, from and
within Lower Manhattan—the area south of Chambers Street in Manhattan.

The Proposed Action consists of the construction and operation of a rehabilitated, reconfigured and
enhanced multi-level, street-level, and subsurface station complex in Lower Manhattan that would serve
12 NYCT subway lines. The complex would extend from Church Street in the west to William Street in
the east. The entry facility (“Entry Facility”) to the FSTC would be located on Broadway between Fulton
and John Streets with a subsurface pedestrian passageway extending on Dey Street west to Church Street.
The FSTC would include improvements to the following four (4) existing connected subway stations that
comprise the existing Fulton Street – Broadway Nassau Subway Station Complex (Existing Complex):

     •    45 Fulton Street;
     •    AC Broadway-Nassau;
     •    23 Fulton Street; and,
     •    JMZ Fulton Street.

In addition to the four (4) existing connected subway stations, the Proposed Action would also include
improvements to the RW Cortlandt Street Station and the E World Trade Center (WTC) Station. In
aggregate, the Proposed Action involves six (6) principal elements:

  1. A new prominent Entry Facility at street-level, with a subsurface level passenger concourse (i.e. the
     Central Station Concourse), centrally located on Broadway between Fulton and John Streets that:
     integrates horizontal connectivity between the AC and 45 service with vertical connectivity
     between the street and different levels; and, provides improved street-level access and visibility.

  2. Rehabilitation of the 45 line Fulton Street Station and the 23 line Fulton Street Station.

  3. A subsurface pedestrian passageway (i.e. the Dey Street Passageway), beneath Dey Street between
     Broadway and Church Street connecting the Entry Facility to the WTC site with an access structure
     on the south side of Dey Street at Broadway (i.e. the Dey Street Access Plaza).

  4. Improvements to the mezzanines and platform access at the AC line Fulton Street Station and
     JMZ line Fulton Street Station, improving circulation and reducing overcrowding conditions.

  5. A pedestrian and passenger connection between the RW and E service.

  6. Improved street access to the subway, including wider and more direct stairways, access for
     disabled customers, and new street entrances.

The FSTC would provide direct access to the future concourse at the WTC site, from which access to a
variety of transit options similar to those existing prior to September 11 is anticipated to be available,
including:

     •    The reconstructed 19 line Cortlandt Street Station;
     •    The reconstructed Permanent WTC Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) Terminal to the west;
          and,
     •    The ferry terminal at the World Financial Center (WFC) further to the west.
October 2004                                                                                         Executive Summary
                                                   ES-1
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Improvements to transit facilities, particularly to the existing complex of stations encompassed by the
Proposed Action, are not only needed to restore transportation functionality in support of the
revitalization of Lower Manhattan, but to accommodate the range of changes that September 11 has
triggered in the broader context of Lower Manhattan’s recovery. This includes the redevelopment of the
WTC site, changes in the uses of certain buildings from commercial to residential, and anticipated
substantial increases in visitor activity. Improvements to Lower Manhattan’s existing transportation
facilities would substantially improve the quality of daily life for the area’s residents and workers and
improve visitor experiences. These advances are important in retaining and developing Lower
Manhattan’s commercial base.

The FSTC is one (1) of three (3) currently identified priority transit projects meant to address the urgent
need for comprehensive transit improvements in Lower Manhattan in response to the events of September
11. The two (2) other priority projects are the WTC Transportation Hub (also referred to as the
Permanent WTC PATH Terminal), sponsored by the Port Authority of New York New Jersey
(PANYNJ), and the South Ferry Subway Terminal Project, sponsored by the MTA and NYCT. These
priority projects were formally identified by New York Governor George Pataki as the “Lower Manhattan
Transportation Recovery Projects” through a coordinated process conducted in late 2002 and early 2003
by the Transportation Working Group, a group of decision-makers including the State of New York, the
City of New York, MTA, PANYNJ and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC).

On February 27, 2003, U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta announced the selection of these
projects as a group of nationally recognized transportation projects designated to receive high-level
attention under President Bush’s September 18, 2002 Executive Order 13274, Environmental Stewardship
and Transportation Infrastructure Project Review. This designation is intended to help expedite the
rebuilding of the transit system damaged in the terrorist attacks as the projects advance through the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process.

The Proposed Action represents a much-needed enhancement of the transit facilities in key Lower
Manhattan locations and also forms an essential node within the larger context of the regeneration of
Lower Manhattan. As such, the Proposed Action would continue to be developed in close consultation
with the other planning entities in Lower Manhattan.

ES.2           PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
The events of September 11 destroyed critical portions of the Lower Manhattan transportation system,
compounding existing deficiencies and jeopardizing the area’s sustainability as a Central Business
District, emerging residential area, and key tourist destination. Rebuilding the Lower Manhattan
transportation network— restoring service, eliminating deficiencies and anticipating future needs—is a
critical basis for the successful revitalization of Lower Manhattan. The New York City’s Vision for Lower
Manhattan (the Mayor’s Vision) outlines the transportation needs of Lower Manhattan as well as the
importance of connecting Lower Manhattan to the rest of the Tri-State area as part of the revitalization
process. The concentration of subway lines at the centrally located Existing Complex makes it integral to
this revitalization process. In order for the Existing Complex to realize its potential for contributing to the
revitalization of Lower Manhattan and the region, its existing and anticipated operational deficiencies
need to be addressed and its connectivity with other transit services and the street network needs to be
improved.

The Existing Complex is critical to the restoration and revitalization of the local and regional economy for
the following reasons:

     •    The Existing Complex houses the largest concentration of subway services in Lower Manhattan;
     •    The Existing Complex is located in close proximity to other transit services (such as the PATH
          service) and to existing and future centers of activity, including the redeveloped WTC site and
          Memorial; and,
     •    The Existing Complex is located centrally within the Lower Manhattan street network.
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-2
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

In order for the Existing Complex to maximize its contribution to the economic recovery of Lower
Manhattan and the region, and meet the increased transportation demand anticipated with the regeneration
and growth in Lower Manhattan, substantial improvements are needed, including:

      •   Improved connectivity of the Existing Complex with the WTC site and Memorial, WFC and
          PATH service;
      •   Elimination of existing operational problems of the Existing Complex (including resolution of
          congestion); and,
      •   Enhanced street-level wayfinding and access to the subway system.
The proposed FSTC would be able to adequately accommodate present customer demands and
anticipated year 2025 levels of demand for movement to, from, and within the FSTC.

ES.3           ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK
This FEIS has been prepared pursuant to NEPA, 42 U.S.C. Section 4321 et seq., and the New York State
Environmental Quality Act (SEQRA), Article 8 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law,
Section 8-0101 et seq., and their implementing regulations, to assist decision-makers in evaluating the
environmental consequences of the Proposed Action and its alternatives, and to identify feasible measures
to mitigate any adverse environmental impacts. The application of NEPA to mass transportation projects
is reinforced in the Federal surface transportation statutes (23 U.S.C. Highways and 49 U.S.C.
Transportation) that require the Secretary of Transportation to ensure NEPA mandates have been met
before approving applications for Federal financial assistance.

NEPA and SEQRA requirements necessitate a comparison between future conditions without the project
(No Action Alternative) and future conditions with the project fully constructed and operational (Build
Alternative). The incremental difference between these two (2) conditions is then considered to be the
impact of the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative is included for consideration pursuant to 40
C.F.R. 1502.14(d) of Council on Environmental Quality regulations and includes other projects, actions
or changes that are anticipated in the foreseeable future in the study area independent of the Proposed
Action. The No Action Alternative also reflects the continuation of existing conditions, deficiencies,
and/or problems that the Proposed Action is intended to address. The Build Alternative is typically
characterized by projecting existing conditions out to the year when the project would be fully operational
and, thus, when operational impacts are likely to be most intense and mitigation measures would have to
be in place. In addition to impacts during operation, this FEIS addresses impacts during construction.
The construction impact analysis identifies a period during which construction is expected to be most
intense and when analysis of potential impacts would, therefore, be most conservative.

Because of the complexity of the planning context of the recovery of Lower Manhattan, this FEIS
presents four (4) reference periods of potential conditions, detailed below, under which the FSTC is
evaluated, thereby providing a framework for full consideration of impacts associated with the project
alternatives.

ES.3.1         PRE-SEPTEMBER 11 REFERENCE CONDITION AND 2003
               RECOVERY CONDITION
The analysis of the FSTC includes a pre-September 11 “Reference Condition,” defined as the existing
conditions in Lower Manhattan on September 10, 2001. The pre-September 11 Reference Condition
provides a context for assessing and understanding impacts in 2005/2006, 2008, and 2025 in addition to
the existing 20031 Recovery Condition. This Reference Condition was defined based on commitments by
the Lower Manhattan Recovery Project sponsors in the document Environmental Analysis Framework for
1
    2003 represents the time when the data, analysis and evaluation and attending preliminary engineering,
    environmental and economic analyses were performed to support this FEIS.

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                    ES-3
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Federal Transportation Recovery Projects in Lower Manhattan (October 2003), based on FTA guidance,
and reflecting coordination between the FTA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the
development of this approach.

The events of September 11 resulted in extensive impacts to the economy, transportation infrastructure,
and environment in Lower Manhattan. The 2003 condition represents a “Recovery Condition” with a
lower level of economic activity, transit service and demand, as well as different patterns of vehicular
traffic and pedestrian activity, than existed pre-September 11. Due to the effects of September 11, the
conditions in 2003 are not considered truly representative of normal conditions in Lower Manhattan. It is
expected that this recovery condition would continue for several years.

ES.3.2         ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING CONSTRUCTION
               IMPACTS: 2005/2006
Construction of the FSTC is anticipated to start in late 2004 and be completed in 2007, with the peak
construction period occurring between 2005 and 2006. This period coincides with the construction of
other projects in the area, including, among others: the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal at the WTC site;
other projects at the WTC site (memorial and high-rise buildings); the Route 9A project running from
immediately adjacent to the WTC site to the west and south to Battery Park; and the South Ferry Subway
Terminal near the southern tip of Manhattan. The 2005/2006 conditions are established by analyzing 2003
conditions and projecting these conditions out to 2005/2006. Construction impacts are identified by
comparing future conditions in 2005/2006 including the major projects noted immediately above, but
without the FSTC project, to 2005/2006 conditions with the FSTC project and the other projects under
construction.

ES.3.3         ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING INITIAL OPERATIONAL
               IMPACTS: 2008
The FSTC is expected to be in its first full year of operation in 2008. At that time, the area of Lower
Manhattan served by the project would still be subject to continued rebuilding efforts. As the area would
not yet have been fully restored, it would not yet be functioning at the level of economic activity and
associated transit demand that would have existed based on projections for 2008 if those projections were
made pre-September 11. Consequently, the FSTC would not be expected to operate with full patronage in
2008.

Several large-scale Recovery Projects would still be under construction in 2008 and the construction
activities associated with those projects would create an environmental setting different from the current
setting. In addition to the large-scale recovery projects, several other projects are expected to be in place
by 2008, including several commercial projects and a large number of residential projects. The residential
projects include both new residential buildings and conversions of existing non-residential buildings to
residential use. In recognition of the substantial changes in environmental context anticipated to occur by
2008, the potential operational impacts of the Proposed Action in 2008 are analyzed in this Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

ES.3.4         ANALYSIS YEAR FOR ASSESSING FULL OPERATIONAL
               IMPACTS: 2025
It is assumed that current and planned revitalization efforts for Lower Manhattan would be successful and
that, therefore, the level of development and activity in 2025 would reflect the economic growth up to that
year, as would have been projected pre-September 11 for 2025. Thus, the year 2025 was selected for the
full operational impact analysis. Conditions in 2025 were established by identifying the conditions
existing pre-September 11 and projecting these conditions to 2025, taking into account anticipated local
land use changes through 2025 for each resource. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that
the land uses that existed pre-September 11 would be reconstructed back to the same or similar conditions
October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-4
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

existing pre-September 11. Where it is expected that replacement land uses could differ substantially from
those which existed pre-September 11, land use projections for 2025 were adjusted appropriately.
Adjustments were made by excluding actions and projects that were expected pre-September 11 to occur
by 2025 but are no longer considered likely, and including those that were not known or considered pre-
September 11 but are now likely to occur by 2025. Where 2025 conditions were uncertain, those
conditions existing or projected pre-September 11 were assumed to prevail.

ES.3.5         CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ANALYSIS
As Lower Manhattan would be subject to several construction and rebuilding efforts over the next decade,
the potential for cumulative effects has been identified by the transportation recovery project sponsors
(MTA, NYCT, the PANYNJ and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)) and the
FTA, as a key matter in the consideration of environmental analysis. The cumulative effects analyses
include the effects of those actions that overlap with the Proposed Action in time and space, affect the
same resource as that affected by the Proposed Action, and represent a change from conditions existing
pre-September 11. The project sponsors identified a number of resource areas that could have unique
potential for adverse cumulative effects. These categories form the basis of the cumulative effects
analysis performed for the FSTC and are as follows:

     •    Air quality;
     •    Pedestrian and vehicular access and circulation;
     •    Noise and vibration;
     •    Cultural and historical resources; and,
     •    Business and economic interests.

To maintain a consistent approach to the cumulative effects analysis of Lower Manhattan Recovery
Projects, the project sponsors and FTA committed to the development and implementation of a
coordinated cumulative effects analysis as presented in the FTA’s Approach to Cumulative Effects
Analysis for the Lower Manhattan Recovery Effort (July, 2003). Key aspects of this approach are:
environmental stewardship, as reflected in Environmental Performance Commitments (EPCs), and a
“building block” approach to multi-project impacts.

Environmental stewardship includes the implementation of EPCs that would contribute to lowering the
potential of an individual sponsor’s project for adverse environmental impacts and, as a consequence, also
lessen the potential for the contribution of all projects to overall adverse cumulative effects in Lower
Manhattan. These commitments would contribute to reducing the potential for a sponsor’s project to
create adverse environmental impacts while reducing each project’s cumulative adverse effects in Lower
Manhattan. This approach recognizes that improvement of access to Lower Manhattan in support of
economic recovery and resumed growth may cause short-term impacts before all potential benefits of
improved public transportation on the Lower Manhattan environment and economy are realized. To
minimize the burden on the environment when improving access to Lower Manhattan, EPCs are being
incorporated into each project. The EPCs consist of measures that would be proactively implemented to
avoid or minimize potential adverse effects of the Lower Manhattan projects on the environment. The
EPCs would be particularly focused on the five (5) resource categories identified above as most sensitive
to cumulative effects.

The “building block approach” would ensure that opportunities for reduction in potential adverse
cumulative effects are made on all projects. This would be achieved through the sequential completion of
cumulative effects analysis for each project within a single evaluation framework comprising consistent
analysis assumptions and methodologies. The delivery of projects using the “building block approach”
would allow each project to advance at its own pace, with identified impacts of completed analyses being
incorporated into the “background” of future projects.



October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                     ES-5
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

For the purposes of this FEIS, the geographic area used as the basis for the cumulative effects analysis is
the area of Lower Manhattan below Chambers Street. NYCT has and would continue to closely
coordinate with the sponsors of the prospective major projects in this area, including the PANYNJ,
NYSDOT, LMDC and City of New York, to understand the characteristics of these actions.

ES.4           PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
NYCT commissioned a concept study in 2002 to investigate potential approaches to improving transit
services in order to contribute to the successful revitalization of Lower Manhattan which had suffered
extensive economic, transportation, infrastructure and environmental impacts as a result of September 11.
This study indicated that the most effective way to integrate existing transit services with potential
improvements involved the construction of:

     •    A street-level facility on Broadway (the Entry Facility) incorporating a subsurface station
          concourse (the Central Station Concourse);
     •    A pedestrian passageway beneath Dey Street connecting the WTC site with the Entry Facility;
     •    Rehabilitation of the 23 and 45 Fulton Street stations;
     •    Improvements to the AC mezzanines and platform;
     •    Construction of a pedestrian connector between the RW and E routes; and,
     •    Improved street access to the subway, including Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
          compliant access.

This combination of elements was presented as the Proposed Action, or Full Build Alternative, in the EIS
Draft Scoping Document issued for public review and comment on April 3, 2003. The Draft Scoping
Document also included a No Action Alternative and a request for public input into variations on Partial
Build Alternatives. The public scoping process generated a number of additional comments relevant to
the development of alternatives which suggested that the process:

     •    Consider variations of the Full Build Alternative that would avoid impacts on historic resources
          and on the historic Corbin Building in particular. This building, located at 192 Broadway, is a
          National Register-listed property of considerable historical interest, and would need to be
          demolished under the Full Build Alternative as proposed in the FSTC Conceptual Design Study
          (Arup, 2002);
     •    Consider a reduction of the property acquisition and demolition proposed within the Full Build
          Alternative, thereby reducing the potential socioeconomic impacts associated with the elimination
          of existing commercial and retail uses;
     •    Expand the Proposed Action to enable the acquisition and development of the entire city block
          between Broadway and Nassau, John, and Fulton Streets with a mix of commercial, retail and
          residential land uses in addition to the improved transit functions; and,
     •    Expand from the Full Build Alternative to include broader subway and intermodal connections.
          Suggestions included connecting to a future Second Avenue Subway (SAS) station on Water
          Street; connecting the PATH tracks with the 6 subway at City Hall Station; and connecting the
          E line tracks with the RW line tracks at Church Street.

Using information from previous planning studies, and with public outreach and agency work groups, the
alternatives proposed in the Draft Scoping Document were further developed and refined during the
environmental review process to generate alternatives for the Proposed Action that were responsive both
to public and agency comments and to the project goals and project Purpose and Need. Particular
attention was paid to avoidance and/or minimization of historic and retail impacts and property
acquisition. These revised or new preliminary alternatives comprised seven (7) partial Build Alternatives
and three (3) Full Build Alternatives, as well as a No Action Alternative. An overview of the preliminary
alternatives and their characteristics is provided in Table ES-1.


October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-6
                                                                                   Table ES-1
                                                                       Overview of Preliminary Alternatives
                                                                          and Associated Improvements



                                                                                    PARTIAL BUILD ALTERNATIVES                                     FULL BUILD ALTERNATIVES
                                                                        WTC
                                                                                    Connection      Central Station Concourse                         Central Station Concourse
                                                                      Connection
                                                                                 to AC Mezzanine        with Plaza Above                               with Entry Facility Above
                                                                         Only
                                                                                                                         No
                                                                                                                                   Corbin                  No integration
                                                                                                                     Integration                                             Corbin Building
                                                                                                         Removal of               Building    Removal of     of Corbin
                                                                      Fulton   Dey    Long    Diagonal                of Corbin                                              Integrated with
                                                                                                           Corbin                Integrated     Corbin      Building and
                                                                       St.     St.   Tunnel    Tunnel               Building and                                              Entry Facility
                                                                                                          Building               with Entry    Building     Entry Facility
                                                                                                                        Entry                                                (Alternative 10)
                                                                                                                                   Facility                (Alternative 9)
                                                                                                                       Facility
                                                                        1      2       3         4           5           6           7            8              9                 10
PROJECT ELEMENTS


Paid-zone passageway from the WTC Complex (RW – E) to the               x
Fulton Street Station Complex (45), (23), (AC), (JMZ)
                                                                        x
ADA Elevators at Fulton and Church
Connector between the northbound platform of the RW and the Fulton      x
Street passageway
Free-zone passageway from the WTC Complex (RW – E) to the
                                                                                x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
Fulton Street Station Complex (45), (23), (AC), (JMZ)
New entrance at Millenium Hotel to provide RW Street Access Stairs              x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
New entrance structure at the southwest corner of Broadway and Dey
                                                                                x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
Street
Stairs from Passageway to street (at John Street)                               x      x         x
Stairs from Passageway to north bound 45 platform                               x      x


Paid connector between Dey Street Concourse and lower AC
mezzanine - Running North-South Under                                                  x
Northbound 45 Platform
Paid connector between Dey Street Concourse and lower AC
mezzanine - Running Diagonally from NE to SW - including a vertical                              x
circulation element midblock on east side of Broadway

                                                                                                                         No
                                                                                                                                   Corbin
                                                                                                                     integration
                                                                                                         Removal of               Building
Below grade Central Station Concourse bounded by John, Broadway and                                                   of Corbin
                                                                                                           Corbin                Integrated
Fulton Streets with Plaza Above Providing Vertical Access                                                           Building and
                                                                                                          Building               with Entry
                                                                                                                        Entry
                                                                                                                                   Facility
                                                                                                                       Facility
AC mezzanine widening between Broadway and Nassau                                                            x           x           x            x              x                  x
East-West Tunnel at 195 Broadway beneath 45 Tracks providing
                                                                                                             x           x           x            x              x                  x
access to SB 45 Platform from Central Station Concourse

                                                                                                                                                           No integration
                                                                                                                                              Removal of                     Corbin Building
Below grade Central Station Concourse bounded by John, Broadway and                                                                                          of Corbin
                                                                                                                                                Corbin                       Integrated with
Fulton Streets with Entry Faciliy Above Providing Vertical Access                                                                                           Building and
                                                                                                                                               Building                       Entry Facility
                                                                                                                                                           Entry Facility
COMMON STREET/PLATFORM ACCESS ELEMENTS
New entrances on the west side of Fulton and Broadway                   x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
New stairs on the southeast and southwest corner of Broadway and
                                                                        x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
Cortlandt Street
Entrances on south side of John Street between Nassau and William       x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x

Entrances on north side of Fulton to the east of William Street         x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x

Entrance on west side of Nassau to the south of Fulton Street           x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
New stairs connecting the east end of the AC platform to the 23         x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
COMMON STATION REHABILITATION ELEMENTS
23 Fulton Street Rehabilitation                                         x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x

45 Rehabilitation                                                       x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
AC Rehabilitation                                                       x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
COMMON ADA ELEMENTS
JMZ/Nassau Street – ADA connectivity                                    x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
ADA elevator on John Street for the 23 Fulton Street Station            x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x

ADA Access at RW-E stairs                                               x       x      x         x           x           x           x            x              x                  x
OTHER COMMON ELEMENTS
RW-E Connector                                                          x       x      x         x           x           x           x                           x                  x
Source: MTA NYCT, Arup, The Louis Berger Group.
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

With the exception of the No Action Alternative, all preliminary alternatives include the following
elements:

     •    A subsurface pedestrian passageway connecting the WTC site with the Fulton Street – Broadway
          Nassau Station Complex (Existing Complex);
     •    Rehabilitation of the 23 and 45 Fulton Street stations;
     •    Improvements to the AC mezzanines and platform;
     •    Construction of a pedestrian connector between the RW and E routes; and,
     •    Improved street access to the subway.

The Full Build Alternatives included an Entry Facility in addition to the elements above, whereas the
Partial Build Alternatives did not include an Entry Facility. All preliminary alternatives proposed to
locate the subsurface pedestrian passageway between the WTC and the Existing Complex beneath Dey
Street, with the exception of Alternative 1, which located the pedestrian passageway below Fulton Street.

The ten (10) preliminary alternatives were evaluated based on the project’s goals, constructability, cost
effectiveness and environmental considerations, especially with regard to historic and socioeconomic
resources. Among the ten (10) preliminary alternatives analyzed, Alternative 8 represented the original
2002 Full Build design concept; it occupied the entire Broadway frontage between John and Fulton
Streets and required demolition of the Corbin Building. This alternative was rejected in the course of the
preliminary alternatives evaluation because its impacts on the Corbin Building, a historic resource, were
deemed unacceptable under Section 4(f). From among all preliminary alternatives considered, the
evaluation resulted in the identification of Alternative 9 and Alternative 10 as the only reasonable
alternatives to be considered for detailed analysis in this FEIS. Both alternatives address and meet the
Project Goals and Purpose and Need while avoiding or minimizing impacts to the Corbin Building. Based
on conceptual level engineering analysis, both alternatives are considered technically feasible and cost
effective. These alternatives were, therefore, selected for further analysis regarding their potential
environmental impacts and have been carried forward for analysis detailed in this FEIS. The No Action
Alternative, and Full Build Alternative 9 and Alternative 10, are briefly described below.

Since the publication of the DEIS, components of the rehabilitation of the 23 Fulton Street Station and
the 45 Fulton Street Station were advanced separately. These rehabilitation activities met the
requirements for a categorical exclusion under NEPA: rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and
bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there
is not a substantial increase in the number of users. Environmental analysis of these rehabilitation
activities confirmed that these activities would not individually or cumulatively involve significant social,
economic or environmental impacts. For impact analysis purposes, however, these rehabilitation
activities are still included in this FEIS as part of the analysis of the Proposed Action.

ES.4.1         NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
The No Action Alternative assumes that the Existing Complex would remain as is, in its existing
operation and configuration, except for routine maintenance repairs that would not be subject to
environmental review. Under this alternative, none of the project elements described as part of the
Proposed Action would be undertaken.

Future conditions analyzed under the FSTC No Action Alternative include reasonably foreseeable actions
and land use changes anticipated to occur between 2004 and 2025. These include background growth
during this period, as well as the construction and operation of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects,
including the following:

     •    The WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan (construction expected mid 2004 to end 2014);
     •    The Permanent WTC PATH Terminal (construction expected early 2005 to end 2008);
     •    The West Street/Route 9A Reconstruction (construction expected mid 2004 to end 2008); and,
October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-8
MTA New York City Transit                                            Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

       •   The reconstruction of the South Ferry Subway Terminal (construction expected mid 2004 to end
           2006).

Both construction and operational aspects of these projects are taken into account for the 2005/2006 and
2008 analysis years of the FSTC No Action Alternative. By 2025, all these projects are expected to have
been completed for several years. Also taken into account in the analysis are roadway reconstruction
activities planned by New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) in Lower Manhattan to
the extent that these activities would affect vehicular and pedestrian access and circulation.

ES.5           BUILD ALTERNATIVES (ALTERNATIVE 9 AND
               ALTERNATIVE 10)
The two (2) Build Alternatives (Alternative 9 and Alternative 10) consist of the construction and
operation of a rehabilitated, reconfigured and enhanced multi-level, subsurface station complex in Lower
Manhattan that would serve 12 NYCT subway lines. As indicated previously, each of these alternatives
include the following elements:

    1. A new prominent Entry Facility at street-level with a subsurface level passenger concourse (i.e. the
       Central Station Concourse), centrally located on Broadway between Fulton and John Streets, that
       integrates horizontal connectivity between the AC and 45 service with vertical connectivity
       between the street and different levels and provides improved street-level access and visibility.

    2. Rehabilitation of the 45 line Fulton Street Station and the 23 line Fulton Street Station.

    3. A subsurface pedestrian passageway (i.e. the Dey Street Passageway) beneath Dey Street between
       Broadway and Church Street, connecting the Entry Facility to the WTC site and including an access
       plaza on the south side of Dey Street at Broadway (i.e. the Dey Street Access Plaza).

    4. Improvements to the mezzanines and platform access at the AC line Fulton Street Station and
       JMZ line Fulton Street Station, improving circulation and reducing overcrowding conditions.

    5. A pedestrian and passenger connection between the RW and E service.

    6. Improved street access to the subway, including wider and more direct stairways, access for
       disabled customers, and new street entrances.

In aggregate, the integrated complex of six (6) subway stations (23, JMZ, AC, 45, RW and
E) and associated connecting corridors would include: improved platforms, mezzanines and connection
corridors and a new Central Station Concourse, with surface presence distinguished by a street-level
Entry Facility on Broadway. The FSTC would extend the Existing Complex one (1) block westward to
Church Street through a new pedestrian passageway below Dey Street. This new passageway would
connect to the future concourse at the WTC site from which access to a variety of transit options, similar
to those existing pre-September 11, is anticipated to be available.

The primary differences between Alternatives 9 and 10 are directly related to the way each alternative
engages the Corbin Building and connects the Dey Street Passageway with the Central Station Concourse
and the street network east of Broadway. With respect to the Central Station Concourse, Alternative 10
allows for a larger Central Station Concourse which provides a more direct and intuitive connection
between the Dey Street Passageway and the Central Station Concourse; this is because the FSTC extends
into the basement of the Corbin Building and implements adaptive reuse2 of the building to minimize
harm to the building.

2
    For the purposes of discussion, “adaptive reuse” is defined as making use of some or all of the Corbin Building for
    subway operations without unduly changing the important historic features or appearance of the building. These

October 2004                                                                                                  Executive Summary
                                                          ES-9
MTA New York City Transit                                         Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Alternative 9 has a smaller Central Station Concourse, as it does not extend into the Corbin Building at
any level; thus, it is, in concept, isolated from the Corbin Building. With respect to John Street access,
Alternative 10 provides street access from John Street to the FSTC through the ground level of the Corbin
Building; Alternative 9 does not provide such access.

Subsequent to the completion of the DEIS, NYCT continued to refine Alternatives 9 and 10, based on
continuing engineering investigations and coordination and, taking into account the comments received
on the DEIS, identified a Preferred Alternative, as described below.

ES.6           IDENTIFICATION OF THE PREFERRED
               ALTERNATIVE
Following the publication of the DEIS, the public environmental review process and interagency
coordination generated comments relevant to the selection of alternatives. Comments were received
throughout the 45-day public comment period, which ended on June 28, 2004. Comments received after
the 45-day review period were also considered. A total of 58 commenters expressed a preference for a
specific alternative analyzed in the DEIS. Of those, 11 indicated a preference for the No Action
Alternative and 47 indicated a preference for a Build Alternative. Of the 47 commenters who expressed a
preference for a Build Alternative, a total of 36 expressed support for a Build Alternative in general,
while 11 commenters expressed explicit support for Alternative 10. None of the commenters who
expressed support for a Build Alternative expressed such support explicitly for Alternative 9. Pursuant to
review of the comments received during the public comment period between May 14, 2004 and June 28,
2004, interagency coordination and input from SHPO and the overall superior performance of Alternative
10 with regard to the Purpose and Need (as described below), Alternative 10 was selected by FTA and
MTA NYCT as the Preferred Alternative. In the interest of full disclosure of potential environmental
impacts and the basis for selecting Alternative 10 as the Preferred Alternative, this FEIS continues to
include Alternative 9 and the No Action Alternative in addition to the Preferred Alternative.

ES.7           CONSTRUCTION METHODS
Because the design of the FSTC would affect the construction methods for the FSTC and because the
design would continue to evolve over the next year, this FEIS assumes a “peak” construction scenario for
the purposes of impact analysis. More specifically, where a variety of alternative construction methods or
techniques could be utilized, the analysis evaluates the methods that are considered to have the greatest
potential for adverse environmental impact. By analyzing construction methods with the greatest
potential for adverse impacts, this conservative approach ensures that the analysis considers construction
methods that have the same or worse potential environmental impacts than those that would ultimately be
used for the construction of the FSTC. The assumption of a sustained construction “peak”, overlaid with
the construction peak of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, ensures that the construction impact
analyses performed in the resource chapters of this FEIS evaluate the highest potential level and
combination of construction activity that could reasonably be assumed to occur. During compilation of
the DEIS, the timing and duration of this peak was assumed to be during 2005/2006 for up to one (1)
year. As indicated in the DEIS, the actual timing and duration of this peak could shift, without affecting
the substance and validity of the analyses. Since the DEIS was published, the construction schedule has
been further refined and the peak construction activities will generally occur during the latter part (fourth
quarter) of 2005, and during 2006. The refinement of the schedule was evaluated and found not to result
in substantive changes to the impact analyses. Future substantive changes in activities will be evaluated
for their potential to change the results of environmental impact analyses conducted as part of the
environmental review process.


  uses might include pedestrian entry into the FSTC via the Corbin Building, or pedestrian circulation space through
  lower levels of the Corbin Building. The specific details of the “adaptive reuse” proposal can be found in Chapter
  11: Cultural Resources.

October 2004                                                                                               Executive Summary
                                                       ES-10
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Construction is expected to start in late 2004 and be concluded by mid-2008, with the peak construction
activity occurring within a 12-month period from late (fourth quarter) 2005 through 2006. This
construction peak coincides with the combined construction peak of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery
Projects.

The following construction activities would occur over the three (3)-year FSTC year construction period:

Deconstruction and removal of buildings: Removal of existing buildings at 189, 194, 196, 200 and 204
Broadway would be required to clear the sites for the construction of the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey
Street Access Plaza. Building removal would be achieved via a process of controlled demolition termed
“deconstruction.” Due to the proximity of other buildings, deconstruction activities would be performed
using low vibration construction equipment. Blasting techniques would not be used.

Relocation of utilities: Some utility relocation would be required prior to the commencement of any cut-
and-cover construction process. Other utility relocations would take place along with excavation
operations or after final structures are in place. For the FSTC, utility relocation activities would be
completed prior to the construction of lateral support and subsurface excavation. It is expected that
utilities would be either temporarily supported in place during construction or temporarily or permanently
relocated, depending on the project design.

Building stabilization and underpinning: Construction of the Dey Street Passageway, the Dey Street
Access Plaza, the 45 underpasses, widening of the AC mezzanine, isolation from or adaptive reuse of
the Corbin Building, and the creation of new vertical circulation access points would entail excavation
immediately adjacent to existing buildings, possibly requiring the use of underpinning.

Cut-and-cover construction and lateral earth support: The use of cut-and-cover construction is a likely
method of construction for the Dey Street Passageway and AC mezzanine widening. Central to cut-
and-cover construction methods is the stabilization of the side walls of the excavation prior to the removal
of subsurface material. There are several different types of lateral earth support systems (e.g. slurry wall,
secant piles) that may be used depending upon site conditions, depth of water table, type of soil and
proximity of adjacent building foundations.

Construction of new buildings and structures: New buildings and structures to be constructed for the
FSTC include the Entry Facility, the Dey Street Access Plaza and minor elements including stairways,
elevators and other project structures. Based on currently available engineering information, both
Alternative 9 and Alternative 10, the Preferred Alternative, would be feasible, although Alternative 10
will require more extensive structural support for the Corbin building. Two key issues require further
evaluation prior to assessing the feasibility of Alternative 10: structural integrity and subsurface
conditions of the Corbin building. Final engineering investigations will be conducted prior to construction
to determine the structural integrity and subsurface conditions of the Corbin building. If unanticipated
engineering conditions are discovered, NYCT will assess the feasibility of constructing Alternative 10.
Should the construction of Alternative 10 prove infeasible, Alternative 9 will be advanced. Until these
factors are resolved, Alternative 9 and Alternative 10 remain under consideration and the project impacts
of each Build Alternative are discussed in this FEIS.

Tunneling: Tunneling would be used for constructing the underpass beneath the 45 line under
Broadway and the RW line under Church Street, for constructing the new subsurface pedestrian and
passenger connector beneath Church Street that would connect the RW and E stations to the Dey Street
Passageway and for constructing the stairs between the AC platform and the 23 platform. To
maintain traffic on Broadway, and to limit disruption to subway service, the tunneling operation would
likely require an incremental underpinning sequence of adjoining station structures along the east side of
Broadway between Fulton and John Streets, in conjunction with careful monitoring of vibration and
subway track movement. Access for construction of the underpass beneath the 45 line would be
provided from the Dey Street Passageway. Underpinning of the RW line and the 45 line subway
structures would be required during construction of the underpasses beneath these subway tracks. Spoils
October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-11
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

from tunneling operations would be removed through the tunnel excavations to street-level for hauling
from the site. Grouting and underpinning operations would most likely be performed overnight and on
weekends to minimize disruption to transit operations.

Station rehabilitation: The rehabilitation and extension of platforms, new stairway access and connection
of the 45 Fulton Street Station to the proposed FSTC would be integral to the construction of the FSTC
and would be sequenced to maintain passenger operations of the existing station. The rehabilitation of the
23 Fulton Street Station is assumed to occur largely within the confines of the existing station.
Improvements to street entrances, removal of demolition debris and delivery of new interior construction
materials would occur at street-level. The construction of new elevators, escalators and stairs to provide
access, including ADA access, to the JMZ platform at the east end of the AC mezzanine would be
performed from within the confines of the existing station.

The construction activities described above would be undertaken to construct the various project elements
of the FSTC. Construction would begin in 2004 with the Dey Street Access Plaza. In 2005, the buildings
on the site of the proposed Entry Facility would be deconstructed and the site cleared and construction
would commence on the Dey Street Passageway. As the structures are removed, construction would start
on the Entry Facility. After construction of the Entry Facility retaining wall, the site would be excavated
to the design elevation and foundations constructed in 2006 and construction of the Dey Street
Passageway would be completed. Other construction activities associated with the widening of the AC
mezzanine between Broadway and Nassau Street, the new subway entrance at 195 Broadway, and the
45 line underpasses would also start during 2006, and would be concurrent with the ongoing
construction of the Entry Facility. The AC mezzanine widening would be sequenced to minimize the
overall disruption to NYCT operations and passengers. A detailed construction schedule is provided in
Chapter 4: Construction Methods and Activities, and summarized below.

2004

     •    23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation

2005

     •    Dey Street Passageway and Dey Street Access Plaza: Utility relocation, lateral earth support
          installation; deconstruction and removal of 189 Broadway; cut-and-cover excavation of
          passageway; and passageway construction;
     •    AC mezzanine: Construction of east portion, relocation of utilities;
     •    RW Underpass: Tunneling and construction of underpass;
     •    23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation; and,
     •    JMZ ADA Access: Construction of elevators.

2006

     •    Dey Street Passageway and Dey Street Access Plaza: Complete construction of passageway, Dey
          Street surface restoration;
     •    Entry Facility: Complete construction of lateral earth support, excavation, construction of
          foundations;
     •    AC mezzanine: Construction of east portion, relocation of utilities, lateral earth support
          construction, mezzanine widening and street surface restoration;
     •    45 underpasses: Construction and underpinning;
     •    Access for southbound 45 at 195 Broadway;
     •    23 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation;
     •    45 Fulton Street Station Rehabilitation;
     •    JMZ ADA Access: Complete construction; and,
     •    ERW Construct access stairs/elevators/escalators at Millenium Hotel.
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                    ES-12
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

2007

     •    Entry Facility: Complete construction of building, interior fitout;
     •    AC mezzanine: Completion of mezzanine widening and street surface restoration;
     •    Access for southbound 45 at 195 Broadway;
     •    ERW Construct access stairs/elevators/escalators at Millenium Hotel.

2008

     •    Entry Facility: Interior fitout.

Construction activity would be carried out in two (2) eight (8)-hour shifts, six (6) days per week for the
majority of construction tasks. Some activities, particularly subsurface construction, safety-related work
and activities that require coordination with NYCT services, would occur anytime within a 24-hour/seven
(7)-day per week period. Truck movements may occur at any time within a six (6)-day week, including
some essential truck movements during morning and evening peak hours. Due to the need to maintain
peak hour services to the existing Fulton Street subway stations during the construction period, certain
construction activities must be scheduled between 10 PM and 6AM. Such activities will be generally
related to peripheral project elements such as the new 45 entrance stairs, 23 station rehabilitation,
AC mezzanine widening, and other entrances and stairwells used to access the JMZ, 23, and
AC lines.

Construction activities would affect pedestrian and vehicular circulation due to potential street-level
disruption. If the entire width of a street were excavated, the street would be closed to vehicular traffic.
Pedestrian access to excavated areas may be disrupted or prevented during cut-and-cover operations.
Additional streets may also be required to incur full or partial lane closures in order to provide staging
areas and to allow the relocation of utilities and other infrastructure. Traffic and pedestrian impacts can
be managed using construction sequencing and lane closure management measures within an overall
Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan (MPT Plan). The MPT Plan would be developed in
coordination with NYCDOT and in conjunction with the MPT Plans of other project sponsors in Lower
Manhattan, such as the PANYNJ and LMDC with respect to the development of the WTC site, and
NYSDOT for the proposed modifications to Route 9A. NYCDOT approvals would assist the
coordination of the construction projects that would be occurring simultaneously in Lower Manhattan.
Since the technical analyses were conducted, the Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects participating in the
Lower Manhattan Construction Coordination Group have continued to coordinate their refined
construction schedules. As a result of this process, the extent of overlap of construction activities is being
reduced from that originally assumed for the analyses, when few details on the projects’ design were
available and highly conservative assumptions had to be made to account for uncertainty. MTA NYCT
will continue this construction coordination process during actual construction to avoid logistical
interference

All construction would be guided by a Construction Environmental Protection Program (CEPP) and
related plans. The Construction Environmental Protection Program (CEPP) describes the environmental
requirements to be met by the contractor for the FSTC. The CEPP assigns specific responsibilities for
environmental compliance and communication, addresses monitoring procedures, and provides an
overview of the types of mitigation measures and coordination necessary to limit potential impacts to the
environment, protected resources, and communities within and abutting the construction area. This
reflects commitments made in the EIS, permit requirements, and NYCT’s registration and commitment to
ISO 14001. This international standard includes a commitment to continual improvement to benefit the
environment through establishing environmental policies, determining environmental aspects and impacts
of products/activities/services, planning environmental objectives and measurable targets, implementing
programs to meet objectives and targets, checking work and taking corrective action if necessary, and
management review.


October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                    ES-13
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Where mitigation is required, planned actions are identified and/or applicable EPCs and other
commitments are made, it would be essential to develop and implement a unified approach among the
Recovery Project sponsors to the extent practicable. Under FTA auspices, these commitments would be
documented, implemented, monitored, continually reviewed with the stakeholders, and improved as
required. NYCT plans to continue to work with the other Recovery Project sponsors throughout the
course of the design, construction, commissioning and operation of the FSTC to ensure minimizing the
cumulative effects that are adverse and maximizing environmental stewardship and economic recovery.
This continued cooperative effort would be based on the past and current cooperative efforts and process,
characterized by the:

     •    Development of the Lower Manhattan Environmental Analysis Framework, co-signed by the
          Recovery Projects sponsors.

     •    Formal Adoption of the Lower Manhattan Federal Transportation Recovery Projects Common
          EPCs by sponsoring agencies. The EPCs provide performance commitments from agencies to
          be implemented prior to and during the construction period.

     •    Formation of the Lower Manhattan Construction Coordination Group (LMCCG) consisting of
          sponsoring government agencies and key stakeholders, that would ensure that Lower Manhattan
          Recovery Projects move forward expeditiously while minimizing the impact to residents,
          businesses, workers, commuters, pedestrians, and vehicles. The LMCCG’s mission includes
          providing the framework or vehicle for a command center or similar entity that would:
          coordinate the work of the participants in the rebuilding process on a daily basis and throughout
          the planning process; institute and implement construction coordination protocols and
          requirements for all government agencies, developers, construction managers, general
          contractors, and contractors to follow for all Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects; mediate
          conflicts in schedules and street and site access among construction projects, agencies, and the
          Lower Manhattan community; and utilize technology to facilitate coordination of Lower
          Manhattan Transportation Recovery Projects.

     •    Enactment of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. The Coordinated
          Construction Act includes the following provisions:
             o Allows public agencies to pre-qualify bidders, which ensures speed and high quality;
             o Allows the City and the utility and telecommunications companies to bid together on
                 infrastructure projects, which greatly reduces the need to rip up streets repeatedly;
             o Requires the use of contractors with state-certified apprenticeship programs on large
                 projects, which increases safety on the worksite, ensures minority access to construction
                 jobs and trains a future skilled workforce;
             o Requires the City to follow the State's laws on the hiring of minority- and women-owned
                 businesses, which ensures wide opportunities;
             o Allows the use of owner-controlled insurance programs and the use of alternate dispute
                 resolution if so desired, which would help win insurance at an affordable rate and reduce
                 costs;
             o Requires all public agencies to use ultra low diesel fuel with construction vehicles,
                 which keeps the air clean and the workers healthy;
             o Makes it easy for public agencies to purchase construction goods, cooperatively and
                 thus, more inexpensively.

ES.8           PUBLIC OUTREACH AND REVIEW PROCESS
The environmental process for the FSTC project was officially initiated on April 3, 2003, when the FTA
published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in the Federal
Register (see Appendix P). The NOI also invited the public to participate in the Project Scoping process,
including attendance at a Project Scoping Meeting. The general public and interest groups were also
invited to participate in the Scoping process via a variety of advertising and outreach mechanisms,
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-14
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

including newspaper notices and the MTA’s web site. In addition, Federal, State, regional and local
agencies were invited by letter to participate in the Scoping process.

A formal Project Scoping Meeting was held on April 29, 2003 at the U.S. Custom House at One Bowling
Green in Lower Manhattan. The Project Scoping Meeting included a formal presentation by NYCT,
followed by an opportunity for the public to provide comments on the scope of the issues to be addressed
in the DEIS. An informal session staffed by MTA and NYCT personnel, including poster boards
providing project information, was held at the same location immediately prior to the formal Project
Scoping Meeting. Comments received from the public, agencies and other interested parties were used to
focus the analyses of potential environmental impacts presented in this FEIS. Formal written responses to
the comments received are included in this FEIS in Appendix P: Part II.

Public involvement has been sought via attendance at general public meetings and presentations to local
civic and community groups and stakeholders in order to achieve full and comprehensive public
participation in the planning of the FSTC. These meetings, which began with the Project Scoping
Meeting, provide a way for citizens to receive information about the project, provide their opinions, and
contribute to the ongoing decision-making process. Every effort has been made to ensure that the widest
possible range of public participants attend these meetings. Attendance has been, and would continue to
be, encouraged through advertising and press releases. A mailing list related to the FSTC project was
established from the outset and has been amended to include additional stakeholders and interested parties
as they are identified. All names included on the mailing list would continue to be notified about future
project information updates.

A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was established by NYCT as a forum to keep agencies informed
about the FSTC project and to solicit input from agencies as the environmental analysis of the project
progresses. The TAC consists of representatives of all of the major transportation, environmental and
planning agencies having planning and/or regulatory jurisdiction in Lower Manhattan, as well as local
elected officials and City agencies and services. TAC members contribute to the environmental review
process by sharing technical expertise, presenting the interests and concerns of their organizations, and
assisting with the distribution of study information to their constituent groups. In addition to the role of
the TAC as a whole, working groups including individual TAC members have been assembled to provide
specific technical input in support of the environmental analyses.

In addition to the TAC meetings, working coordination sessions were held by NYCT with various
stakeholders. These included sponsors of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, such as LMDC,
PANYNJ, NYSDOT, the New York Police Department (NYPD), the Fire Department of New York
(FDNY) and public agencies such as the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Landmarks
Preservation Commission (LPC). Regular working sessions were also conducted with specific groups
such as the Downtown Alliance, New York City Economic Development Corporation and NYCDOT to
discuss a wide range of issues. These issues included EPCs, technical analysis methodologies, pedestrian
circulation, economic development, street reconstruction, air quality, noise, cultural resources, safety and
security, construction traffic coordination and access to local businesses. The technical methodologies and
baseline data used for the environmental analyses in this FEIS reflect the conclusions and outcome of this
coordination.

The FSTC project is located within the boundaries of Manhattan Community Board 1 (CB1), covering the
area from the southern tip of Manhattan island to as far north as Canal and Baxter Streets. During this
FEIS process, NYCT held three (3) meetings with CB1. These meetings enabled CB1 to obtain
information on the FSTC and provide input into the environmental review process.

Further advice from recognized experts in performing NEPA reviews for similarly complex projects was
implemented through a peer-review of this FEIS. The peer reviewers consisted of representatives from
other major transit organizations (Boston, Chicago, Washington D.C.) and the Pennsylvania Department
of Transportation (Penn DOT).

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-15
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Upon completion of the DEIS, a Notice of Availability (NOA) was published in the Federal Register.
The DEIS was circulated to those agencies with jurisdiction by law, parties that expressed an interest,
either through the scoping process or in response to the NOA, and other entities potentially affected by
any of the alternatives. Copies of the DEIS were made available for public review on the MTA website
and at designated locations (CB1 office and the offices of local elected officials) throughout the study
area. Following the publication of the DEIS on May 14th 2004, a public hearing on the DEIS was held
on June 8th, 2004 at NYCT’s offices at 2 Broadway in Manhattan. The hearing provided a formal,
additional opportunity for public and agency review of the FSTC. The Public Hearing included a poster
session staffed by MTA and NYCT personnel providing project information. To reach the widest
possible audience prior to the hearing, notifications were published in the Federal Register and placed in
local and citywide newspapers, including those used for the earlier NOI; the New York Post, the Daily
News, the Amsterdam News and El Diario, and posted in local subway stations. A total of 85 members
of the general public, including public officials and agency staff, signed the attendance sheet at the Public
Hearing. At the hearing 28 speakers participated by making statements for the record. Written comments
on the DEIS were accepted until June 28th, 45 days after the release of the document. A total of 23
written comment letters were received during that period. Two more letters were received after June 28th.

A summary of input received at the hearings, which itemizes issues or areas of concern that required
follow-up and/or response, is included in Chapter 25 of this FEIS. This summary includes comments
received as testimony during the public hearing as well as those received in writing during the comment
period. Responses have been prepared to address the comments received and are available to the agencies
and the public as part of the Final EIS (FEIS) process. The full testimony of the hearing and copies of
comment letters are included in Appendix P.

This FEIS addresses the comments made on the DEIS during the DEIS public hearing and comment
period. The FEIS identifies the comments received and provides responses in Chapter 25: Response to
Comments on the DEIS. In addition, several chapters of the FEIS have been revised, where appropriate,
in response to the comments received. This FEIS identifies a Preferred Alternative, reflects minor
refinements to the project design that have emerged since publication of the DEIS, and provides detail on
the project design as preliminary engineering has advanced. These refinements are delineated in
appropriate chapters of this FEIS. In addition, the FEIS analyzes the results of these refinements as
appropriate.

The NOA of this FEIS was published in the Federal Register and also in the same newspapers used for
the NOA for the DEIS. This FEIS identifies the Preferred Alternative, mitigation measures that will be
developed to minimize significant adverse impacts, and EPCs to further minimize environmental effects
associated with the implementation of the FSTC. The FTA may prepare a Record of Decision no sooner
than 30 days after the publication of a NOA of this FEIS, stating FTA’s basis for their decision on the
Proposed Action.

The public outreach program for the FSTC complies with the requirements of: NEPA and those of
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (as implemented by Federal regulations
appearing at 36 C.F.R. 800); Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (49 U.S.C.
303(c)); and, Executive Order 12898 which addresses environmental justice issues in Federal decision
making. This FEIS provides an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the project’s
environmental effects (NEPA), effects to historic and archaeological resources (Section 106), and effects
on parks and historic properties (Section 4(f)).

ES.9           KEY AGENCY PERMITS AND APPROVALS
The Proposed Action may require or involve the following regulatory agency notifications, actions,
permits and/or approvals:



October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-16
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

FEDERAL

     •    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. §§4321 et seq.; 40 C.F.R. 1500; 23 C.F.R.
          771): NEPA requires Federal agencies to assess the environmental impacts of major Federal
          actions that may significantly affect the environment before taking such an action through an
          environmental assessment or environmental impact statement unless the action is excluded or
          exempt from NEPA. FTA is the lead Federal agency for the NEPA review for the Fulton Street
          Transit Center.

     •    National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. §470A; 36 C.F.R. 800): Projects potentially
          affecting historic and archaeological resources must comply with the National Historic
          Preservation Act Section 106 review process. FTA is responsible for carrying out the Section 106
          review for the Fulton Street Transit Center. This includes Advisory Council on Historic
          Preservation (ACHP) review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

     •    Department of Transportation Act Section 4(f) (49 U.S.C. §303(c); 23 C.F.R. §771.135): Section
          4(f) prohibits the Secretary of Transportation from approving any program or project that uses
          any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or
          historic site of national, state or local significance unless there is no feasible and prudent
          alternative to the use of such land, and unless the program includes all possible planning to
          minimize harm to the site or resource. FTA would make the determination of consistency with
          Section 4(f).

     •    Environmental Justice (Executive Order 12898 of 1994, 59 C.F.R. 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994); 1997
          USDOT “Order to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
          Populations,” 62 C.F.R. 18377 (April 15, 1997): These Orders require that impacts and benefits
          from a Federal transportation project are equitably distributed among all population groups and
          that minority or low-income areas are not overburdened with the adverse aspects of proposed
          project alternatives. FTA is responsible for complying with this Executive Order.

     •    Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §7506(c); 40 C.F.R. 93; ECL Article 19; 6 NYCRR Part 201):
          Transportation projects must conform to the applicable state implementation plan.

     •    Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. §1451 et seq.; 15 C.F.R. 930; NY Executive Law Art.
          42; 19 NYCRR Part 600): Projects affecting New York’s coastal zone must be consistent with the
          Coastal Zone Management Act, through the New York State Department of State’s (NYSDOS)
          Coastal Management Program and New York City’s approved Local Waterfront Revitalization
          Plan. The New York State Department of State, in consultation with the New York City
          Department of City Planning, makes a determination of the project’s consistency with the Coastal
          Zone Management Act.

     •    Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as
          codified in Title 42, Section 4601 et seq. of the United States Code, and the applicable
          implementing regulations set forth in Title 49, Part 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations
          (collectively, the “Uniform Act”): This Act relates to relocation services, moving payments,
          replacement housing payments and other allowable payments related to commercial and
          residential moving costs and displacement.

STATE

     •    New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP): Review is
          required pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act and State Historic Preservation Act.

     •    NYS Department of State: Coastal Zone Consistency Determination is required.

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-17
MTA New York City Transit                                           Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

      •    Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC): Stationary source and indirect source air
           permits may be required.

      •    Eminent Domain (NY Eminent Domain Procedure Law; N.Y. Public Authorities Law §§1266,
           1267): Property acquisition procedures apply to the acquisition of property by eminent domain.

ES.10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED
      ACTION
A large-scale infrastructure project such as the FSTC would necessarily result in unavoidable disruptions
during construction. Once completed, the operating FSTC would have a range of beneficial effects on its
immediate and surrounding neighborhoods. It is anticipated that the effects of the operation of the FSTC
would be predominantly beneficial, though some construction-related adverse impacts would be expected,
as summarized in this section. Cumulative effects are also summarized. A summary of mitigation and
other planned actions that are proposed or are being evaluated to address the project’s impacts are
included at the end of this Chapter; Table ES-3 at the end of this Executive Summary provides a summary
of impacts, planned actions and mitigation for the project by resource category.

The No Action Alternative would not result in construction impacts, but would also not generate the
benefits anticipated to be associated with the FSTC. Continued operation of the Existing Complex in its
current condition would not as readily support the revitalization of Lower Manhattan, as it would not
improve access to and from Lower Manhattan and thereby would not support increased economic
development.

ES.10.1 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
The Proposed Action would not result in any adverse impacts to traffic and parking, or to transit and
pedestrians in the 2005/2006, 2008 and 2025 analysis years. Following is a summary of the analysis.
Unless otherwise noted, the impact discussion applies to both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative would not result in any impacts to traffic, parking, or transit and pedestrians in
the 2005/2006, 2008 and 2025 analysis years, but would also not provide the operational benefits
associated with the Build Alternatives. Under the No Action Alternative, there would not be enhanced
pedestrian flow in the study area in 2008 and 2025, as would occur under the Build Alternatives. All
elements projected to operate at Level of Service3 (LOS) E or F in the No Action Alternative would
remain as such, and would not benefit from the substantial improvements associated with either Build
Alternative.

The No Action Alternative would also not provide the travel time savings anticipated in 2025 under the
Build Alternatives. The anticipated travel time savings in the Build Alternatives would not be achieved,
and travel time would be expected to increase as the number of subway patrons increase in future years.
Non-subway pedestrians would also not benefit from the convenience and travel time saving offered by
the Dey Street Passageway under either Build Alternative.




3
    LOS is a qualitative assessment of the quality of pedestrian circulation through passageways and on platforms and
    the “Volume to Capacity” ratio on stairways and escalators. LOS is expressed in the range from A (excellent) to F
    (very poor) and provides an indicator of pedestrian congestion. At LOS A or B, passengers enjoy free movement
    unaffected by the presence of other pedestrians. However, at LOS E or F, passenger densities are high and
    movement is extremely restricted.

October 2004                                                                                                 Executive Summary
                                                         ES-18
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

BUILD ALTERNATIVES - TRAFFIC AND PARKING

Construction Impacts

Construction of the FSTC would require the temporary closure of Dey Street to through traffic and
parking between Church Street and Broadway, and the temporary closure of Fulton Street between
Broadway and Nassau Street. Temporary vehicular access restrictions would occur near the intersection
of William Street and John Street and on John Street between Nassau Street and Broadway. None of the
intersections analyzed would experience an impact as a result of truck traffic generated by the
construction vehicles or related lane and roadway closures. Delay increases would be relatively minor and
all would be within the established threshold. All of the roadway and lane closures proposed as part of the
FSTC construction activities would remove curb loading and unloading from the study area. Since no on-
street parking spaces for vehicles would be lost as a result of these curb closures, no impacts are
anticipated for the off-street parking facilities. The closure of Dey and Fulton Streets to through traffic
would limit truck access to businesses. A portion of the total right-of-way width on these roads would be
used to maintain emergency access and destination deliveries. Except for curb loading and unloading for
the Century 21 Department store, no through traffic would be permitted on Fulton Street or Dey Street
during the construction period. Traffic projected to use Dey and Fulton Streets is expected to use
alternate routes in the study area. Alternative loading areas could be established to accommodate truck
deliveries during construction. An overview of illustrative MPT plans is included in Appendix C to this
FEIS.

Operational Impacts

In 2008 and 2025, a portion of the pedestrians currently traversing Broadway and Church Street would be
expected to use the Dey Street Passageway. As the amount of pedestrian traffic crossing these streets
would be reduced, relative to the 2008 and 2025 No Action Alternative, circulation conflicts between
pedestrian and vehicular traffic would be less likely to occur, especially during peak hours. This benefit
would contribute to a better flow of vehicular traffic, including construction traffic associated with the
Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects still under construction in 2008. The reduction of potential
circulation conflicts between pedestrians and vehicular traffic would also contribute to greater pedestrian
safety.

Since minimal to no vehicular traffic is projected to be generated by either Alternative 9 or the Preferred
Alternative in 2008 or 2025, no adverse impacts on traffic or parking conditions are anticipated as a result
of operation of the FSTC. Since there would be no adverse impacts, no mitigation measures would be
required.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES - TRANSIT AND PEDESTRIANS

Construction Impacts

Pedestrian flow along Fulton and Dey Streets and William and John Streets would be maintained
throughout the duration of construction. Because of construction activity, a portion of the pedestrian flows
would shift from Dey Street to Cortlandt and Fulton Streets. As a result, some crosswalk flows would
increase and some would decrease. The congestion increases at some crosswalk locations in 2005/2006
(as a result of pedestrian diversions during the construction period) would be temporary and would be
offset by improvements at other crosswalk locations.

During construction, strategic construction phasing would be used to reduce impacts to the patrons of the
subway stations by providing new pedestrian pathways before the existing ones are removed.
Construction would be advanced early in those areas of the stations that are not currently well utilized in
order to provide refuge for passengers away from necessary construction in the congested areas of the
stations in later stages.


October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-19
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Operational Impacts

The FSTC project would enhance pedestrian flow throughout all of the subway elements in 2008 and
2025 in comparison to the No Action Alternative. The diversion of pedestrians using the crosswalks in
the No Action Alternative to the subsurface Dey Street Passageway for the Build Alternatives would
reduce street-level pedestrian flow and improve crosswalk LOS. Pedestrian flows would shift from Dey
Street, Cortlandt Street, Fulton Street and Vesey/Ann Streets to the Dey Street Passageway, thereby
reducing pedestrian crosswalk flows across Church Street and Broadway.

Under Alternative 9, passage through the Corbin Building would not occur and pedestrians would need to
either access the Dey Street Passageway west of Broadway or walk around the northeast corner of
Broadway and John Street. This would result in higher pedestrian volumes at these locations in
Alternative 9 compared to the Preferred Alternative. Alternative 9 would thus result in poorer pedestrian
circulation at these locations than the Preferred Alternative, although even under Alternative 9, pedestrian
circulation would still, in almost all cases, be better than under No Action conditions.

ES.10.2 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
The social and economic conditions analyzed include: land use, zoning and public policy; economic
conditions such as employment and business; and community character. Following is a summary of the
analysis for the No Action and Build Alternatives.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative would not create adverse impacts on land use, economic conditions and
community character in the study area. It would be compatible with current zoning and public policy, as
the Existing Complex would remain in its existing configuration and operation. The current land use of
the FSTC site would be expected to continue.

Under the No Action Alternative, the City and regional economies would not benefit from the incremental
purchases, employment, and indirect economic activity related to construction activity of the FSTC. The
operational benefits associated with the Build Alternatives would not be achieved. Existing and new
residential, transit and commercial developments in the study area would not be supported by the
improved transit access, wayfinding and system efficiencies expected under the Build Alternatives.

Under the No Action Alternative, there would be notable changes in local and regional accessibility
within the primary study area by 2008. New transit infrastructure at the WTC site would be built to route
pedestrians through a network of sub-grade concourses to simplify and shorten the pedestrian paths of
transit passengers and to alleviate street-level sidewalk congestion. Central to this redevelopment would
be construction of the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal and concourse network. The Permanent WTC
PATH Terminal would also act as a central hub for numerous subsurface pedestrian concourses. PATH
passengers, shoppers, and tourists would be able to traverse the entire WTC site from Battery Park City,
to the eastern side of Church Street, without the need to exit to street-level; new tunnels are proposed
below West and Church Streets.

These access improvements are consistent with post-September 11 policies and plans for Lower
Manhattan that identify the age, poor design and lack of sub-grade connectivity as critical factors that
could hinder the revitalization of Lower Manhattan. In the absence of the FSTC within the Existing
Complex, this connectivity would not extend to the several NYCT subway lines that converge at Fulton
Street. The large volumes of workers employed in the new commercial developments at the WTC site
who arrive at the Existing Complex would be required to ascend to street-level on Fulton Street or
Broadway, merge with local retail pedestrian traffic, and cross Church Street and Broadway in order to
access the WTC site. Similarly, the existing transfers among subway lines would remain unchanged and
would continue to hinder wayfinding and the utility of MTA transit facilities.

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-20
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

The No Action Alternative would not contribute to the anticipated revitalization of Lower Manhattan, or
to potential future improvements to land use as proposed in the Mayor’s Vision, or the enhancements
under consideration by the LMDC for the Fulton Street Corridor. These proposals would be greatly
enhanced by the presence of the FSTC. Large volumes of commuters arriving and departing from the
existing Fulton Street stations would create substantial pedestrian congestion at existing entrances. The
existing stairwell entrances, presently recessed into alcoves within buildings or located in the center of
sidewalks, would continue to create physical barriers to smooth pedestrian flow. In the absence of the
proposed Entry Facility, wayfinding would continue to be compromised, and the immediate
neighborhood would lack a visible and obvious portal to the various subway lines that converge at Fulton
Street.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES - LAND USE, ZONING, AND PUBLIC POLICY

Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not create adverse impacts to land uses in the study area
and would be compatible with current zoning resolutions.

Construction Impacts

The construction of the FSTC under both Build Alternatives would be consistent with the policies of the
Federal, State, and City governments which have as their main objective the revitalization of Lower
Manhattan. Alternative 9 would acquire and remove five (5) buildings on Broadway and Dey Street as a
result of the construction of the FSTC Entry Facility and the Dey Street Access Plaza. These buildings
are currently used for commercial purposes. The Preferred Alternative would acquire and remove these
same five (5) buildings and would also require acquisition of the Corbin Building (following consultation
with the NYSOPRHP) and its subsequent integration with the FSTC Entry Facility. Potential construction
impacts on nearby land uses and community facilities would be minimized through implementation of the
EPCs and the CEPP. The Corbin Building’s use under the Preferred Alternative would be converted from
commercial office and retail to primarily public use with some retail elements.

Operational Impacts

During its operation, the FSTC would facilitate the planned transformation of the surrounding area into a
24-hour mixed-use community and would achieve the project’s goal to improve transportation systems
through improvements to transit facility wayfinding, inter- and intra-modal connectivity and pedestrian
access. Because of the high concentration of workers commuting to the area daily, the FSTC related
operations would encourage the location of businesses to the area because of improvements in commuting
efficiency and experience. Development of the FSTC would also be consistent with making the area
more desirable for residential land uses in part by providing alternate subsurface pedestrian routes for
commuters that would relieve congestion on the sidewalks used by community residents and other
pedestrians.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES - ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

Construction Impacts

Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not create adverse impacts to economic conditions in
the study area. Both alternatives would support economic activity in Lower Manhattan directly through
the infusion of capital expenditure for construction. Over 1,300 construction-related and secondary jobs
would be created during the estimated three (3) to four (4) year construction period of the FSTC and
would generate total industry sales and earnings exceeding $700 million. Businesses permanently
displaced or relocated from the FSTC site could be relocated in the vicinity; there is a large inventory of
vacant space in the area to accommodate these relocations. Retail businesses in the area of construction
that are not directly displaced would likely be disrupted to some degree, owing to temporary pedestrian
and loading access changes. Site-specific maintenance and protection measures would be implemented
during construction to mitigate these impacts. These include EPCs to maintain access and MPT Plans.
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-21
MTA New York City Transit                                       Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Operational Impacts

Some new retail businesses would be incorporated in both Build Alternatives and this would partially
offset some of the loss of retail at this location due to building removal during construction. The number
of businesses displaced would be larger under the Preferred Alternative, as the Corbin Building would be
converted to public space. In Alternative 9, there would not be any permanent displacement of businesses
in the Corbin Building. The estimated annual fiscal impact, i.e., loss of property tax revenue, is estimated
at $1.0 million for Alternative 9 and $1.2 million for the Preferred Alternative.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES - COMMUNITY CHARACTER

Construction Impacts

Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative do not create adverse impacts to community character (i.e.,
population and demography, neighborhoods, and community facilities). Although construction is
unlikely to directly affect overall land use, population and permanent employment in the area, localized
construction noise, air quality, visual and circulation effects would cause temporary impacts. These
impacts would be closely contained within the immediate area of construction and would not permanently
impact community character in the larger area surrounding the FSTC.

Construction of the FSTC would not burden the use of, or access to, community facilities in the study
area. No facilities are located adjacent to the proposed location of any construction activities. Normal
vehicular, transit, and pedestrian access would be maintained to all community facilities.

Operational Impacts

The direct displacement of existing commercial tenants from the site of the FSTC is not expected to
create adverse permanent impacts to the neighborhood surrounding the FSTC. The street-front retail
establishments and small commercial and institutional offices displaced by the FSTC are part of a larger
commercial district comprised of similar land uses and do not represent unique services or facilities. New
retail space would be included within the Entry Facility along Fulton Street and Broadway, approximately
where it is currently located in the community. The proposed FSTC would be a facility that houses public
transit and public retail spaces; a land use that is similar to current land use on the site and one that is
compatible and supportive of existing neighborhood character.

Although the FSTC would provide increased convenience and reduced crowded station conditions, the
amount of subway service would not materially change. The FSTC would not adversely disrupt the
existing vibrancy of the street-front retail district, nor would it discourage the area’s transformation into a
24-hour mixed-use residential and commercial community. It is expected that the FSTC would facilitate
this transformation and its Entry Facility would act as a visual icon in the center of the revitalized district.

ES.10.3 PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND PARKLANDS
No substantial adverse impacts on public open space would occur as a result of construction or operation
of the FSTC under Alternative 9 or the Preferred Alternative. Although the FSTC Build Alternatives are
not expected to generate increased passenger volumes, the FSTC is anticipated to increase the quality of
access to local parklands and recreational facilities, such as the prospective WTC Memorial and
associated open spaces and City Hall Park, as well as the open spaces in Battery Park City and South
Street Seaport areas.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine
maintenance measures and repair activities. No impacts on public open space would occur. Open space
conditions in the study area are expected to change in the future under the No Action Alternative, with
October 2004                                                                                             Executive Summary
                                                     ES-22
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

several additions and improvements being implemented by other agencies expected to be complete by
2005/2006. The No Action Alternative would not result in the benefits to public open space afforded by
the Build Alternatives, which include improving conditions in daytime pedestrian zones by relieving
pedestrian congestion, and provision of improved access to open space including new parks on the WTC
site and along the Hudson River.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

During construction, both alternatives would cause some disruptions to daytime pedestrian zones on
Fulton, John, Dey and Nassau Streets. Under the Preferred Alternative, access to the pedestrian zone
would be restricted for a longer period of time than would occur under Alternative 9, due to the additional
effort required in the adaptive reuse of the Corbin Building. Under both alternatives, there would also be
some construction related noise and dust impacts on St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, although these
would be managed consistent with the EPCs, the project CEPP, and NYCT’s ISO 14001 commitments.
Portions of One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church Street Plaza would be occupied during the construction of
FSTC entrances located at those sites. These impacts would be controlled and mitigated through EPCs
and the CEPP.

Operational Impacts

The initial and full operation of the FSTC (analysis years 2008 and 2025) would benefit daytime
pedestrian zones by relieving pedestrian congestion, and would provide improved access to open space
including new parks on the WTC site and along the Hudson River and the East River.

ES.10.4 URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES
The FSTC is anticipated to have a positive long-term effect on the area’s visual resources and urban
design, through enhanced wayfinding and the establishment of an attractive and efficient transit hub.
Nonetheless, there would be some temporary adverse impacts during the project’s construction phase. No
permanent adverse urban design and visual resources impacts are anticipated.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative would not allow the achievement of the operational benefits of the FSTC, and
the associated improvements for wayfinding, urban design, and visual resources. The Existing Complex
would remain in its current condition, and the potential for the creation of a visual focal point for Lower
Manhattan subway transit would not be achieved.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

During construction, both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require the removal of five
(5) buildings – four (4) along Broadway that would be replaced by construction of the Entry Facility, and
one (1) on the south corner of Dey Street at Broadway which would be replaced by the Dey Street Access
Plaza. The Corbin Building’s façade and existing uses would remain the same under Alternative 9. Under
the Preferred Alternative, the same five (5) buildings would be removed and the Corbin Building would
be acquired by NYCT and adaptively reused within the FSTC Entry Facility; the façade of the Corbin
Building would be restored to reflect original conditions to the extent practicable. Other potential
construction impacts include the visual presence of construction materials and equipment. These impacts
would be temporary, as streets and sidewalks would be returned to their original state following the
completion of construction. As such, the proposed FSTC under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred


October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-23
MTA New York City Transit                                   Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Alternative is not expected to result in substantial adverse impacts to urban design features within the
immediate and surrounding areas.

Operational Impacts

During operation, the FSTC would provide a visual focal point in Lower Manhattan, benefiting residents,
workers and visitors, and improving the efficiency of the transit system in Lower Manhattan. The FSTC
would strengthen the east-west connectivity in Lower Manhattan and act as a principal link to the rebuilt
WTC and Memorial. The main Entry Facility and Dey Street Access Plaza would afford views from the
facility to the surrounding streets, improving orientation for transit patrons. The FSTC would also
contribute to historic preservation in Lower Manhattan, through the retention of the historic Corbin
Building and improved subway access to the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. Under
Alternative 9, no direct access through the Corbin Building would be provided. Under the Preferred
Alternative, public access to parts of the Corbin Building would be provided and, through the Corbin
Building, direct access between the FSTC and the Historic District would be provided.

ES.10.5 DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The No Action Alternative assumes that the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine
maintenance measures and repair activities. As a result, no easements or properties would be acquired
and no occupants or owners would be displaced.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

Construction of the FSTC would result in adverse impacts to businesses and residents where access to
building entrances is disrupted, where work nearby requires temporary relocation for safety reasons,
where property is acquired for off-street staging areas, and where property would be acquired for
permanent vent structures or station entrances. Construction-related disruptions to access would generally
be short-term and temporary. Basement tenants in the Corbin Building could be temporarily displaced
during the construction of Alternative 9 due to potential underpinning work. NYCT would employ all
practicable and proven methods to avoid temporary displacements. Under the Preferred Alternative all
tenants in the Corbin Building, approximately 50 businesses, would be permanently displaced.

Operational Impacts

Permanent acquisitions and easements would also be required for structures to support operation of the
FSTC. Under Alternative 9, five (5) buildings would be permanently acquired on Broadway (189, 194-
196, 198, 200-202 and 204-210), and the occupants displaced and compensated in accordance with
Federal and State requirements to permit the construction of the Entry Facility and the Dey Street Access
Plaza. Under the Preferred Alternative the Corbin Building at 192 Broadway, in addition to the five (5)
Broadway properties described immediately above, would be acquired; occupants would be displaced and
relocated or compensated. Under both Build Alternatives, improvement of subway access inside or
adjacent to the buildings at 95 Fulton Street, 135 and 150 William Street and 166-170 Broadway may
affect the businesses operating in those buildings.

Under both Build Alternatives, a series of easements would be required, or existing easements would
need to be modified, to facilitate construction of various project elements. These easement requirements
are the same for both Build Alternatives with one exception, specifically, an easement may be required at
15 John Street under the Preferred Alternative for underpinning the Corbin Building.

All property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, and in accordance with the New York State
October 2004                                                                                         Executive Summary
                                                  ES-24
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Eminent Domain Procedure Law. Most relocating businesses are likely to be successful in finding
suitable alternative space near their current locations because the inventory of vacant office, retail,
warehouse and other commercial space in Lower Manhattan is anticipated to be large enough to
accommodate the needs of most displaced businesses.

The two (2) Build Alternatives differ primarily with respect to the use of the Corbin Building. Under
Alternative 9, an underground retaining wall, possibly in combination with underpinning or similar
method of support, would structurally isolate the Corbin Building from the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey
Street Passageway.

ES.10.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The effects of the Proposed Action on historic and archaeological resources have been assessed in
accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the New York State
Historic Preservation Act of 1980. These laws, and the associated regulations which implement them,
require Federal and State agencies to consider the effects of their actions on any properties listed on or
determined eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Historic properties
are also protected by Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966. Among other things,
Section 4(f) and 4(f) implementing regulations prohibit actions by the Secretary of Transportation that
require the use of a historic property that is listed on or eligible for inclusion on the State and National
Registers, unless a determination is made that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to such use, and
all possible planning has been undertaken to minimize harm to the 4(f) property. A summary of the
Section 4(f) evaluation is included at the end of this Executive Summary.

Study areas, known as Areas of Potential Effect (APEs), were identified in consultation with the New
York SHPO; historic resources were identified through field surveys and documentary research within
each APE in consultation with the SHPO. Based on research conducted, potential for archaeological
deposits or features is considered possible within the study area, despite the extent of construction
disturbance that has historically occurred in the area, both pre- and post-September 11. Potential for
archaeological deposits or features is considered possible within the study area, despite the extent of
construction disturbance that has historically occurred in the area and disturbance from the New York
City Transit subway facilities. Archaeological resources could potentially exist in several areas: at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Dey and Church Streets, along the eastern sidewalk of Church
Street, north and south of Dey Street; Dey Street, under the sidewalks; Cortland Street, west of Broadway;
Maiden Lane, east of Broadway; Fulton Street, between Broadway and William Street; William Street,
between Ann Street and John Street; and John Street, east of William Street, as described in the Phase 1A
Archaeological Study

Historic resources are those that: have been officially recognized (i.e., properties that are listed or have
been found eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places), are National
Historic Landmarks or New York City Landmarks, and/or are properties that have been considered for
designation as New York City Landmarks, including historic districts. Designated historic resources
within the APE comprise:

     •    National Register listed or eligible resources - Corbin Building (192 Broadway), Fulton Street
          45 Subway Station, the former AT&T Building (195 Broadway), the Bennett Building (139
          Fulton Street), the East River Savings Bank (25 Dey Street), St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, the
          WTC site, and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District; and,
     •    New York City Landmarks listed or eligible - the Bennett Building, Fulton Street 45 Subway
          Station, and St. Paul’s Chapel and Graveyard, Keuffel & Esser Building (127 Fulton Street) and
          the Royal Insurance Building (150 William Street).




October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-25
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

As a result of modern urban construction activities or lack of historic period occupation, intact
archaeological deposits or features are unlikely to be present in the majority of the study area, although
potential for archaeological resources does exist in several areas, including beneath the southern sidewalk
of Dey Street and the northeast corner of the intersection of Dey and Church Streets as well as other areas
in the Archaeological APE, as identified in the Phase 1A Archaeological Study (July 2004). Furthermore,
as the No Action Alternative would not require ground disturbance within the archaeological APE, the No
Action Alternative would not affect archaeological resources.

Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be constructed or operated. As the FSTC would
not be constructed, the Corbin Building would not be affected. Long term benefits associated with the
long-term preservation of the Corbin Building, and public access to the Corbin Building, as provided by
the Preferred Alternative, would not be realized. Improved subway access to the John Street-Maiden Lane
Historic District, and other historic resources in the area, as provided by the Build Alternatives, would
also not be realized under the No Action Alternative.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

Under Alternative 9, the Corbin Building may need to be modified in order to maintain fire emergency
egress in accordance with applicable codes on the Corbin Building’s northern wall. Modifications to the
Corbin Building under Alternative 9 would be designed to conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties and other relevant guidelines and management
procedures. Indirect impacts related to vibration during construction could occur to the Corbin Building.
These would be managed through a vibration monitoring program and/or subsurface construction, as
appropriate and required.

Under the Preferred Alternative, the Corbin Building would be underpinned and would be adaptively
reused as part of the FSTC Entry Facility and Dey Street Passageway. This would require the permanent
displacement of certain tenants in the Corbin Building. While this alternative would cause adverse
impacts on the Corbin Building, the impacts will be minimized and mitigated by designing the Entry
Facility to conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties
and other relevant guidelines and management procedures. NYCT is engaged in ongoing consultation
with SHPO during the design process to ensure that the standards would be met.

Other historic resources that would incur construction impacts as a result of the FSTC under both Build
Alternatives include the Fulton Street 45 Subway Station and the AT&T Building. These impacts
would be addressed through compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
of Historic Properties and other relevant guidelines and management procedures. The entire Fulton Street
45 Station will be recorded in accordance with HABS/HAER Level II guidelines prior to any alteration
and the documentation of the station will be deposited by NYCT in publicly accessible repositories,
including at the New York Historical Society and the New York City Public Library. The alterations of
the station will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties,
as practicable. Design plans for the alterations to the station will be developed in consultation the SHPO
and submitted at the preliminary and pre-final completion stages for SHPO approval. If SHPO makes
substantive comments during the pre-final design review, SHPO may request the opportunity to approve
the final design. With respect to the proposed adaptive reuse of the Corbin Building under the Preferred
Alternative, the alterations of the building will adhere to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation of Historic Properties (codified in 36 CFR 68.3(b)), as practicable. Design plans for each
of the alterations to the building and rehabilitations of the building will be developed in consultation with
the SHPO and submitted at the preliminary and pre-final completion stages for SHPO approval.
Therefore adverse impacts on the resources will be mitigated.

October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-26
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Historic sites that could incur vibration impacts from construction under both alternatives are the National
Register-eligible East River Savings Bank, Bennett Building, the Keuffel & Esser Building (127 Fulton
Street, the Royal Insurance Building (150 William Street) and some non-designated historic buildings
located within the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. Under the Preferred Alternative, the
Dennison Building, as a contributing element to the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, could also
require underpinning and/or grouting. This would not affect any of the features that qualify it for
inclusion in the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, nor would it affect the integrity of the District.
Vibration impacts are not expected to compromise the structural integrity of any of these buildings or
affect the historic features that lend them protection status or qualify them for inclusion in the Historic
District. All appropriate and practicable measures would be taken during construction to avoid impacts to
these historic resources, including those related to vibration, through a formal consultation process, the
project CEPP and a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP). As archaeological resources may be
encountered during the construction of either Build Alternative, the CRMP would include an Emergency
Action Program to address any potential archaeological impacts. This would include the requirement of
an archaeologist certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists on the preliminary engineering
team to address any potential archaeological issues that may be relevant to the final design of the FSTC.

The FTA, MTA (on behalf of both NYCT and MTA Capital Construction Company), SHPO, and ACHP
have signed and executed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) regarding the treatment of historic and
archaeological resources within the APE that may be affected by the Proposed Action. The New York
City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) and the Lower Manhattan Emergency Preservation
Fund (LMEPF) are consulting parties in the Section 106 review process. The PA also contains specific
measures by which identified impacts would be mitigated and sets forth the process and procedures for
consultation, determination of effect and resolution of any as yet unidentified adverse effects that would
govern the planning, design and implementation of the project from the date of the PA’s execution. The
PA is included in Chapter 11.

Operational Impacts

Under Alternative 9, the Corbin Building would remain in private ownership; under the Preferred
Alternative, the Corbin Building would be acquired by the MTA and would be provided increased long-
term Federal preservation protection. Construction of the Entry Facility and Dey Street Access Plaza
would not require the removal of any buildings within the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District.
Under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, the Entry Facility would introduce new
architectural elements into the existing setting of the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, in the
vicinity of the Corbin Building, the AT&T Building, the Bennett Building and, potentially, St. Paul’s
Chapel and Graveyard. The design approach for the new Entry Facility is, and would continue to be,
receptive to and committed to achieving a design that respects the historic properties around it. The PA
included with this FEIS establishes a consultation process and mitigation measures by which the design of
the FSTC (including the new Entry Facility) will be developed in accordance with the Standards of the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties, so as to avoid as
practicable the introduction of visual elements that would diminish the integrity of the significant features
of historic resources within the APE. Unlike Alternative 9, under the Preferred Alternative, direct public
access to parts of the Corbin Building would be provided along with direct access through the Corbin
Building to and from John Street, the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District, and the Entry Facility.

ES.10.7 AIR QUALITY
As required by the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA has set standards for six (6) major air
pollutants: nitrogen dioxide and ozone, together a concern for regional levels of ozone; carbon monoxide;
respirable particulate matter (referred to as PM10, indicating particulate matter with a diameter equal to or
less than 10 micrometers, and fine particles, or PM2.5); sulfur dioxide; and lead. These standards are
referred to as the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). On a regional basis, ozone levels
are of concern, since the entire New York metropolitan area (NYMA) currently exceeds the Federal
standard for ozone. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by motor
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                    ES-27
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

vehicles contribute to the formation of ozone. PM2.5 is also of concern regionally, because it can remain
suspended in the air for long periods of time and, therefore, can be widely dispersed. On a localized
basis, pollutants of concern are carbon-monoxide (CO), which is produced predominantly by motor
vehicles, and respirable particulate matter, which comes from diesel emissions, industrial sources, and
dust, among other sources. New York City was designated in 2002 as in attainment for CO; however,
Manhattan is designated as non-attainment for PM10. The CAA requires each state to submit to the EPA a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attainment of NAAQS.

An analysis of the air quality effects of the project’s construction activities and operational conditions on
nearby receptors was performed. Construction impacts associated with the FSTC could occur as a result
of emissions from construction-related equipment, trucks and other traffic, and diversion of non-
construction related traffic to alternative routes. The analysis of these impacts for the FSTC also includes
potential traffic and construction equipment associated with other Lower Manhattan recovery and other
projects, which reflects the potential for cumulative air quality impacts. During operation, the FSTC
would not generate mobile source emissions, as it would not generate any traffic. The operational
analysis, therefore, includes an evaluation of the potential benefits associated with a reduction in traffic as
a result of increased efficiency of the FSTC, and the potential emissions associated with fossil fuel
consumption utilized by the emergency generator during the operation of the FSTC.

Section 176(c) of the CAA of 1990, as amended (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7506(c) requires all federally
sponsored or approved activities in nonattainment or maintenance areas to conform to the applicable SIPs.
EPA has developed criteria and procedures to determine conformity. The CAA established the criteria
and procedures that Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FTA, and Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) must follow to determine the conformity of federally funded or approved highway
and transit plans, programs, and projects to the SIPs. Conformity is intended to ensure that transportation
plans, programs, and projects do not produce new air quality violations, or delay timely attainment on
NAAQS. All federally supported activities must conform to the implementation plan’s purpose of
attaining and maintaining these standards.

To demonstrate conformity, a Proposed Action must not exacerbate or delay the achievement of
attainment of standards in the NYMA. Accordingly, an area’s MPO, which is the entity responsible for
transportation planning, is responsible for demonstrating conformity with respect to the SIP on
metropolitan long range transportation plan (LRTPs) and transportation improvement programs (TIPs).
The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC) is the MPO for the region. NYMTC
approved the conformity determination for the LRTP, known as the Regional Transportation Plan entitled
“Mobility for the Millennium”, on September 23, 1999, and the most recent 2002-2004 TIP was approved
on September 20, 2001.

The LRTP and TIP have now lapsed. As a result of the events of September 11, the loss of NYMTC’s
files containing regional transportation air quality data, and the damage incurred to the downtown mass
transit system, the conformity requirements of the NYMA have been temporarily waived. This waiver
expires on September 30, 2005, pursuant to Public Law 107-230; (Stat. 1469) enacted October 1, 2002.
Following enactment of the waiver, the Interagency Consultation Group (ICG) was tasked with tracking
the air pollution emission effects of transportation projects in the Downstate New York region including
Lower Manhattan.

As a result of this law, project conformity analyses are substituted by following the ICG procedures
which are established to ensure consistency with the region’s air quality goals. NYCT initiated
consultation with the ICG in February 2004, indicating that the Proposed Action is intended to reconstruct
and renovate transit buildings and structures and, according to the provisions of 40 C.F.R. 93.126 would
be exempt from transportation conformity analysis. This was further corroborated by analysis which
indicated that any increase in the station usage would be primarily attributable to transit customers
shifting their station selection or transfer point to the FSTC and that the incremental effects of the
improvements on transit and automobile trip preferences would be negligible. On March 3, 2004, the ICG
subsequently concurred with the analysis and indicated that the FSTC project may be classified “exempt”
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-28
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

for the purposes of transportation conformity, based on the exempt category “Reconstruction or
renovation of transit buildings and structures” under 40 C.F.R. 93.126.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, land use changes would occur in Lower Manhattan through 2005/2006,
with associated changes in vehicular traffic volumes. It is anticipated that traffic volumes and associated
emissions will increase between 2003 and 2006, as Lower Manhattan continues to recover from the
events of September 11 and resumes its economic growth. In addition to the increase in emissions
resulting from economic growth, emissions will increase in Lower Manhattan as a result of construction
of Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, including the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment project, the
construction of the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, the construction of the South Ferry Terminal and
the Route 9A Reconstruction activities. Traffic flow in Lower Manhattan will also be affected by the
Lower Manhattan Street Reconstruction Program by NYCDOT. Construction activities will generate
emissions from construction equipment and construction trucks associated with a broad range of
activities, including transportation of spoils and construction and deconstruction materials. Under the No
Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine maintenance measures
and repair activities that would not be subject to environmental review. Adverse effects resulting from
FSTC construction would not occur.

Through 2008, the trend of conversion of commercial buildings to residential uses and the transformation
of existing retail/service establishments to address the needs of the residential population is expected to
continue. While no substantial land use changes are expected to occur by 2008 in the immediate vicinity
of the FSTC site, several major residential and commercial development projects are projected for
completion from 2006 to 2008. Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects that will have been completed by
2008 include the South Ferry Terminal Project, the Memorial component of the WTC Memorial and
Redevelopment Plan and certain construction activities associated with the reconstruction of Route 9A.
Projects still under construction in 2008 include the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal (scheduled for
completion in 2009), and several components of the WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan.

The main contributors to air quality at the receptor locations analyzed for the FSTC consist of the
construction activities for the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, south of Church Street and the
construction of the WTC Memorial, further south toward Route 9A. By 2008, the Permanent WTC PATH
Terminal would be past its 2005/2006 construction peak and the WTC memorial would have been
completed. As construction emissions (from construction trucks and construction equipment) in the
immediate vicinity of the analyzed receptor locations would be reduced past their 2005/2006 peak, air
quality after 2006 is expected to improve over 2005/2006 conditions. In addition, by 2008, it is
anticipated that due to more stringent nationwide emission controls, emissions per vehicle will decrease,
further contributing to reduced emissions.

Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would continue to operate similar to current
conditions. The Existing Complex would generate no traffic and any stationary emissions would be
minor.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

The analysis of the construction impacts of the FSTC during the peak construction period (2005/2006)
indicated that the construction of the FSTC would not result in any regulatory exceedences of NAAQS
under either Build Alternative. The ambient air quality impact analysis assumed the use of ultra low-
sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel for certain types of on-site equipment for construction of the FSTC and
predicted no exceedances for the following pollutants:

     •    CO (one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour)

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-29
MTA New York City Transit                                           Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

      •    NO2 (annual average);
      •    PM10 (annual average); and,
      •    SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual average).

The ambient air quality impact analysis (which assumed the use of ULSD fuel) shows that the predicted
PM10 (24-hour) concentrations would potentially exceed the NAAQS if no further emission management
were performed. Planned mitigation for these potential exceedences is based on the assumed
implementation of EPCs, and the application of a range of retrofit technologies, the CEPP, and related
plans to minimize construction impacts. The analysis indicated that the implementation of such measures
would continue to result in acceptable levels of NO2 in the vicinity of the project during construction and
that the 24-hour PM10 standard would no longer be exceeded. The analysis of PM2.5 emissions4 is
presented in Chapter 20: Coordinated Cumulative Effects Analysis.

The Build Alternatives would be implemented with the incorporation of EPCs and in accordance with the
provisions of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. The EPCs consist of on-site
measures that would include the use of ULSD fuel and retrofit technology in heavy-duty engines and off-
road construction vehicles as operating during the construction of the FSTC, including during year
2005/2006, the peak period of construction. With regard to air quality, the Coordinated Construction Act
for Lower Manhattan requires all public agencies to use ultra low diesel fuel with construction vehicles,
thereby reducing pollutant emissions.

Although the EPCs require the use of ULSD for off-road construction equipment 60HP and above, NYCT
is committed to the use of ULSD for nonroad vehicles of 50HP or above, consistent with the requirements
of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan. Diesel engine retrofit technology will be
required in off-road equipment to further reduce emissions. As required by the Coordinated Construction
Act for Lower Manhattan, NYCT will require that non-road vehicles of 50 HP and above are retrofitted
with Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC), Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) or technology that achieves
lowest particulate matter emissions. Based on currently available data, Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF)
will be the preferred retrofit technology, with Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) as a fallback when the use
of DPF is not practicable. Other EPCs include a dust control plan related to the construction site through a
soil erosion sediment control plan which would be part of the Construction Environmental Protection
Program. The dust control plan could include: spraying of a (non-hazardous, biodegradable) suppressing
agent on disturbed soil and other surfaces; containment of fugitive dust; and, adjustment of work practices
to reflect meteorological conditions as appropriate.

An example of the construction specifications and the CEPP associated with the control of air quality
during the construction phase of the project is included in Appendix C. This draft specification and CEPP
addresses the emissions related to diesel powered non-road and on-road construction equipment, and dust
control measures for both new construction and deconstruction-related activities.

Potential air toxics (asbestos and lead (Pb)), if present in any of the properties proposed for
deconstruction, would be fully abated in compliance with all applicable federal and state requirements
and NYCT established procedures. Further details are provided in Chapter 16: Contaminated Materials
and Waste Management.

Operational Impacts

As indicated previously, FSTC project has been classified “exempt” for the purposes of transportation
conformity, based on the exempt category “Reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and
structures” under 40 C.F.R. 93.126. Conformity is intended to ensure that transportation plans, programs,
and projects do not produce new air quality violations, or delay timely attainment on NAAQS. The
Proposed Action is intended to reconstruct and renovate transit buildings and structures; any increase in

4
    PM2.5 are particulates with an aerodynamic equivalent diameter less than 2.5 micrometers (µm)

October 2004                                                                                                 Executive Summary
                                                         ES-30
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

the station usage would be primarily attributable to transit customers shifting their station selection or
transfer point to the FSTC. Therefore, the incremental effects of the improvements on transit and
automobile trip preferences, and their resulting effects on automobile-related emissions, would be
negligible.

The operational air quality impact analysis shows that the FSTC would not exceed the NAAQS for CO
(one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour), and SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual average) during both the
2008 (Initial Operation) and 2025 (Full Operation) analysis years for both Build Alternatives. Steam
would be used to heat the facility and the heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and
emergency generators that would be associated with the FSTC would not be expected to generate
measurable levels of emissions. Operational emissions associated with HVAC systems are too low to be
modeled to a quantifiable degree. Furthermore, as a beneficial public transit project, the FSTC would
provide an environmentally friendly alternative to vehicular travel by improving transit system efficiency.

ES.10.8 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Following FTA’s guidance for predicting noise and vibration impacts for transit projects, an analysis was
conducted of the potential for airborne and ground-borne noise and vibration impacts during the
construction and operation of the FSTC. Existing noise levels in the project study area are relatively high
during almost all hours of the day, reflecting the urban environment in which the project is located. The
predominant sources of noise include vehicular traffic (including commuter buses, delivery and garbage
trucks and other vehicles), emergency sirens, construction activities associated with ongoing recovery
efforts (such as street reconstruction and utility installation) and recovery activities at the WTC site.

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, existing commercial land uses in the study area in 2005/2006 would
continue and the Existing Complex would be maintained in its current state. No major construction
activities at the FSTC site would be anticipated. Construction activities associated with the Permanent
WTC PATH Terminal and WTC Memorial and Redevelopment Plan would result in elevated noise and
vibration levels in the vicinity of the Existing Complex, particularly at properties located along Church
Street, such as the Millenium Hotel.

Without the Proposed Action, no major construction activities are anticipated at the Existing Complex.
Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit
infrastructure maintenance and repair during this analysis year. As a result, there would be no adverse
impacts from mobile (construction traffic) or stationary (including movable and stationary construction
equipment) sources attributable to the No Action Alternative upon noise conditions or vibration levels in
the study area.

In 2008 and 2025, the Existing Complex would be maintained in its current state and configuration.
Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit
infrastructure maintenance and repair. These activities would not have any significant impacts on noise
or vibration levels in the study area.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

The construction noise analysis indicates that Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would result in
similar noise levels primarily because the construction activities associated with both are very similar.
Under both Build Alternatives, adverse impacts on airborne noise would result in several locations during
construction periods because of the proximity of construction to certain sensitive land uses. Noise levels
at receptor locations where no mitigation is employed would exceed one or more of the FTA construction
impact criteria at most locations. These impacts would occur for distances of between 10 to 170 feet from
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-31
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

where construction operations would take place. Construction activities would shift along the project
corridor during different phases of work. Some locations would necessarily be noisier than others,
particularly where equipment and machinery is required for aboveground portions of the construction
activity.

Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, construction vibration levels at four (4) of the five (5)
identified historic properties would exceed FTA criteria during the construction period.

Currently, three (3) categories of noise control measures are being explored: design considerations and
project layout; sequence of operations; and alternative construction methods. The CEPP and related
plans, to be developed prior to construction and implemented throughout construction, will incorporate
these measures. Potential relevant elements of the CEPP include: emission limits and performance
standards; designated truck routes; noise monitoring; and design considerations and project layout (e.g.,
temporary acoustic barriers or enclosures, equipment silencers, electrically operated equipment, and
acoustic truck liners, among other potential measures). Many of these are already required during an
NYCT construction project pursuant to standard NYCT construction specifications. A draft outline of the
CEPP and draft noise specifications for construction contracts for NYCT’s Lower Manhattan Recovery
projects are included in Appendix C of this FEIS for illustrative purposes. These requirements will be
finalized as the design process continues. When finalized, these requirements will be incorporated into
construction contracts for the FSTC to ensure that the EPCs are committed to and will be enforceable.

Operational Impacts

The FSTC would not generate substantial traffic increases, so there would be no associated increases in
traffic-related noise. There would be no increase in train operations and associated operational noise
levels. Under both Build Alternatives, the potential stationary sources of noise would be the HVAC and
mechanical systems. Although future noise levels would not be substantially different from existing
ambient levels, there is the potential for noise impacts associated with operation of rooftop mechanical
equipment. Although the FSTC would be structurally designed to accommodate HVAC and mechanical
within the buildings to minimize noise impacts to adjacent uses and public areas, some equipment would
need to be located within the roof area of the Entry Facility. This could result in noise levels impacting
occupants of 15 John Street and 144 Fulton Street, due to the proximity of rear facade windows in these
properties. Although silencers and/or enclosures would be used to minimize these impacts, further
mitigation is expected to be necessary to achieve compliance with the New York City Noise Code. As
part of ongoing design, opportunities are being explored to avoid or mitigate impacts. These include
investigation of the technical feasibility of using quieter equipment types, noise barriers and window
replacement/insulation.

Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, there would be no changes to the existing subway
alignments and profiles, in the type of trains using the track (i.e., suspension and wheel conditions would
remain the same) and track structure. Therefore, the alternatives are not anticipated to result in a change
in vibration levels at adjacent sensitive receptors, and there would not be any vibration or ground-borne
noise impacts by the Proposed Action, as outlined in Chapter 13: Noise and Vibration.

ES.10.9 INFRASTRUCTURE, ENERGY, AND SOLID WASTE
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would remain as is, except for routine
maintenance measures and repair activities. No improvements to infrastructure would be required. As a
result, there would be no impacts to infrastructure. Under the No Action Alternative, current demand for
energy, telecommunications, water, and solid waste disposal capacity in the study area would remain
essentially the same. The existing utilities and infrastructure would not be subject to the beneficial
replacement and upgrading with more sustainable and energy efficient facilities that would be associated


October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-32
MTA New York City Transit                                   Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

with the construction of the FSTC (with the exception of improvements associated with NYCDOT street
reconstructions).

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts
The construction of both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require utility replacement and
relocation throughout the area directly affected by construction of the FSTC, including relocation of
sewer, water, gas and steam mains, and telecommunications and electricity cables. Several of the utility
replacements would also occur under the No Action Alternative, as part of NYCDOT’s street
reconstruction program for Lower Manhattan. These replacements and relocations are not anticipated to
result in any adverse impacts to service, as relocations and replacements would be located within utility
corridors established during construction, and temporary replacement supply could be obtained from local
services unaffected by construction. Fuel and energy requirements during construction would not be
substantial and could be obtained from the local supply without adverse impacts. The construction of
Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would require minor modifications to subsurface vaults and
basement structures. The affected utilities in these areas would have to be relocated to other available
areas within the basements and sub-basements of affected buildings. It is not anticipated that this would
result in any adverse impacts.

Operational Impacts
The operation of Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not have any adverse impacts on
infrastructure, energy consumption, or solid waste generation in the study area. Water, electricity,
telecommunications, gas and solid waste demands would not be substantial and would be accommodated
within the existing supply network in the study area without adverse impact. Steam would be used for
heating purposes in the operation of either alternative. NYCT would also implement Design for the
Environment (DfE) sustainable design guidelines within the engineering and design of the FSTC to
improve environmental performance and reduce energy consumption. Operation of the FSTC would also
result in beneficial operational impacts, as existing water, sewer and gas mains and telecommunication
conduits and ducts would be newly built to current engineering and environmental standards. This would
have the substantial benefit of reducing the probability and frequency of failures within the affected
existing infrastructure system.

ES.10.10 NATURAL RESOURCES
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be built and no adverse impacts to natural
resources would occur. The Existing Complex would remain as is with the exception of routine
maintenance and repairs. By 2006, several large scale development projects in the study area are
expected to be under construction in Lower Manhattan under the No Action Alternative. These projects
are not expected to impact existing natural resources.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

Construction of the FSTC would not alter the underlying geology on Manhattan, nor would it be expected
to have any impacts to groundwater, floodplains, terrestrial vegetation and wildlife, or endangered,
threatened and special concern species. Construction activities would be controlled through the CEPP.
The State protected peregrine falcon, although present within the vicinity of the FSTC, would not be
adversely impacted by construction.


October 2004                                                                                         Executive Summary
                                                  ES-33
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

Operational Impacts

The initial and full operation of FSTC (in 2008 and 2025) would alleviate pedestrian and commuter
congestion in the study area without any adverse impacts on natural resources, and would make a positive
contribution to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan.

ES.10.11 CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, minor upgrades and maintenance to the Existing Complex would be
performed that could impact potential asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP)
surfaces. These activities may also impact polychloro-biphenyl (PCB)-containing equipment and
mercury-containing light bulbs. Prior to initiating these activities, comprehensive surveys would be
performed and ACM and LBP surfaces would be identified. Suspect PCB-containing equipment and
mercury-containing light bulbs would also be surveyed. Prior to initiating the work, the potentially
contaminated materials, identified through the surveys, would be abated or removed consistent with
NYCT specifications.

Under the No Action Alternative, the FSTC would not be operational in 2008 nor 2025 and potentially
contaminated materials would remain in situ. Any ACMs and/or LBP surfaces encountered during
upgrades to and maintenance of the Existing Complex would be identified and removed prior to the
maintenance/upgrade activities consistent with NYCT specifications.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

The preliminary investigation undertaken for this FEIS identified an initial list of locations in and along
the project corridor that may have contaminated soil, soil gas, or groundwater. The potential for presence
of asbestos, LBP and mercury in buildings, steam lines and other utilities was also assessed. During
construction, there is a potential that contaminated materials could be uncovered, either in locations where
research indicated a potential problem or in other unexpected locations. Based on the results of the
analysis, no subsurface contaminated materials conditions currently exist at the FSTC project site.
Nonetheless, to protect workers and the public and to reduce the potential for their being exposed to these
contaminants, a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) would be developed and implemented by
contractors for each construction phase, defining mandatory health and safety requirements that the
contractors and subcontractors would meet. Any contaminated materials encountered during construction
would be handled, stored, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable regulations and in compliance
with the HASP.

Operational Impacts

No adverse impacts from contaminated materials are expected during initial and full operation of the
FSTC. Once construction activities are completed, any remaining subsurface contaminated materials
would be contained by paved areas or other barriers and would not present a hazard to the public.
Asbestos or LBP would be removed from structures prior to deconstruction/renovation and disposed of in
accordance with applicable regulations. The operation of the FSTC would not be expected to generate
any contaminants.

ES.10.12 COASTAL ZONE CONSISTENCY
The portion of the FSTC that lies within the New York City coastal zone is limited to the western end of
the proposed Dey Street Passageway and RW - E connection at Church Street. Proposed construction
in this area includes street entrances and improved access to the subway mezzanine and platforms,
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-34
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

including wider and more direct stairways and access for disabled customers. The project’s location in
the coastal zone necessitates consultation with the State and City for determining consistency of the
project’s construction and operations with Coastal Zone Management Policies. An assessment of the
project’s consistency with New York City’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) was
therefore conducted as part of this FEIS. The Coastal Zone consistency analysis contained in this FEIS
indicates that the FSTC would be consistent with all applicable coastal zone policies during both
construction and operation. Concurrence with this was provided by NYS Department of State by letter
dated June 29, 2004 (Appendix M). Any impacts that could occur in the coastal zone at the western end
of the project are considered to be temporary and minor in nature and would be associated with
construction only. Coastal zone consistency would be achieved during construction through adherence to
relevant regulations and guidelines, and implementation of measures employed to prevent environmental
impacts.

ES.10.13 SAFETY AND SECURITY
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, the Existing Complex would be maintained and operated in its current
state. Minor maintenance and rehabilitation activities could occur, including typical station and transit
infrastructure maintenance and repair. Although NYCT would continue its usual programs and
procedures to assure passenger and facility safety and security throughout the transit system, the Existing
Complex would continue to suffer from the safety and security concerns associated with crowded peak-
hour operating conditions. Operational inefficiencies created by poor LOS associated with current system
deficiencies would continue. In the event of a safety or security incident, the No Action Alternative
would not allow NYCT to take advantages of improved safety and security conditions that could be
created within the Build Alternatives.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES

Construction Impacts

Under both Build Alternatives, construction of the FSTC would be implemented in compliance with
relevant Federal, State and City codes, policies and guidelines, including those of NYCT, intended to
protect safety and security for construction workers, patrons and the general public. Construction
contracts would incorporate requirements for developing and implementing a contract-specific HASP to
protect construction workers and the public. The NYCT would monitor to ensure compliance with each
HASP. As a result of these measures, the proposed FSTC under both Alternative 9 and the Preferred
Alternative is not expected to result in adverse impacts to safety and security during the construction
phase.

Operational Impacts
Operation of the FSTC would improve public safety and security by the implementation of enhanced
safety and security features. A number of features would be included in the design to enhance and
maximize safe use of the FSTC, including adequate spacing in public areas, use of natural light, and a
visible police presence. The Preferred Alternative, and to a lesser degree Alternative 9, would include
retail spaces surrounding the lower levels of the Entry Facility. This would further contribute to safety
and security, especially during off-peak hours. The Preferred Alternative, and to a lesser degree
Alternative 9, would reduce the number of “blind spots” that pose a safety and security concern compared
to the No Action Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative provides a direct view from within the east end of the Dey Street Passageway
into the Central Station Concourse of the Entry Facility and the escalator up into the Corbin Building. In
Alternative 9, the view from within the Dey Street Passageway to the east end of the Dey Street
Passageway terminates in a blind wall (in order to avoid the Corbin Building) and provides only an

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-35
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

oblique view of the Central Station Concourse in the Entry Facility. This feature of Alternative 9
diminishes the benefits for safety and security that are realized in the Preferred Alternative.

Improved safety and security, especially in the event of emergency conditions, would be provided in the
Preferred Alternative, compared to the No Action Alternative, by providing egress on all three (3) sides of
the FSTC bounded by Fulton Street, Broadway and John Street. Similar, but less extensive, improvements
to safety and security would be realized under Alternative 9; Alternative 9, in order to avoid the Corbin
Building, would not provide direct egress to John Street.

The FSTC design would be based on applicable prescriptive codes as well as performance-based fire
protection design approaches considering potential hazard scenarios. The design would also be based on
results of a Smoke Purge Study and a Threat and Risk Assessment Study which would be completed as
part of ongoing engineering. Security measures would be included in the design and operation features
consistent with the current security methods, practices and procedures being employed and implemented
by NYCT.

ES.10.14 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Under the No Action Alternative, temporary impacts associated with the construction of the FSTC would
not occur, but neither would the permanent benefits of the FSTC for Manhattan communities, including
low-income and minority communities. Without the FSTC, the Lower Manhattan recovery would be
affected, thereby adversely affecting the long term vitality of Lower Manhattan communities, including
low-income and minority communities.

BUILD ALTERNATIVES
As a project that would use Federal funds, the FSTC must comply with Executive Order 12898, “Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations”. This
Executive Order requires Federal agencies to identify and address disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations
and low-income populations, and to include outreach to the public in its decision-making process. In the
area affected by the FSTC, the portion of Chinatown within the study area boundaries represents a
community of concern for environmental justice issues because a portion of the construction truck route
would pass through this area. Based on the evaluation of impacts identified in the noise, air quality,
traffic, social and economic conditions, and displacement and relocation chapters of this FEIS, it has been
determined that the construction of the FSTC would not result in disproportionately high or adverse
impacts on low income or minority communities.

The FSTC would not result in disproportionately high or adverse human health or quality of life impacts
to communities of concern related to construction truck traffic off-site. The construction-related truck
traffic routes would pass through neighborhoods with both high and low proportions of low-income and
minority persons. Overall, the race, ethnicity and income characteristics of the secondary truck route
study area are similar to those of Lower Manhattan as a whole. In addition, the increase in traffic along
these City-established truck routes is not anticipated to be substantial nor result in traffic, air or noise
impacts, as defined by established impact threshold criteria.

All property acquisition required for the FSTC would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in accordance with the
New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law. In the case of relocating displaced businesses, it is
anticipated that adequate space is available for relocation elsewhere in Lower Manhattan and that
relocation of these establishments would not result in an overall change in land use or community
character in the adjacent neighborhood in the primary study area or in communities of concern in the
secondary study area. No indirect business or residential displacements or overall change in land use or

October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-36
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

community character would result from the FSTC in communities of concern or other neighborhood
areas.

The FSTC project would result in improvements to the overall transportation service in Lower Manhattan.
Improved access to Lower Manhattan would not only make it an attractive business destination but also
contribute to restoring Lower Manhattan to its pre-existing economic development potential. The project
would benefit workers, transit riders and visitors; residents in the area would also benefit from the
transportation service improvements. No single racial, ethnic or income group would be denied the
overall benefits anticipated by the project. The operation of the FSTC would not result in impacts to
resources that would be borne disproportionately by low income or minority communities of concern.

ES.10.15 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The cumulative effects analysis presented in Chapter 20 of this FEIS has been prepared in accordance
with the FTA’s Approach to Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Lower Manhattan Recovery Effort (FTA,
2003). The impacts of the FSTC were conservatively analyzed by including in the analysis the
cumulative effects of all Lower Manhattan Projects combined for each resource throughout the technical
chapters of this FEIS. Among the resources cumulatively analyzed throughout this FEIS, five (5) were
identified as being especially important because of their interrelationship, because the events of
September 11 in particular affected these resources, and because the management of these resources was
considered most instrumental for optimizing recovery and growth with minimal adverse environmental
impacts. Consistent with the focus on these resources, a separate chapter in this FEIS is dedicated to the
discussion of cumulative effects on these resources. Reflecting the importance of these five (5) resources
for recovery and environmental protection, the EPCs also focus on these particular resources.

In a coordinated effort, the FTA, other Federal partners, and local project sponsors identified the
following five (5) critical environmental factors as resources of particular concern for cumulative effects:
air quality; access and circulation; noise and vibration; cultural and historic resources; and economic
factors. Following are conclusions from the cumulative effects analysis from Chapter 20 for each of the
analysis years: 2005/2006, 2008, and 2025 for each of the Build Alternatives during construction and
operation. The effects of the No Action Alternative are discussed under the preceding technical resource
categories within this Executive Summary.

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
Coordination on the development of the access and circulation analysis among NYCT, FTA and the other
Lower Manhattan Transportation Recovery Project sponsors occurred through several meetings in 2003
and 2004 during which potential issues, analytical methods to address the issues, and data to support the
analysis were discussed. As a result of these meetings, traffic, parking, transit, and pedestrian data,
analyses results and methodologies were shared by the Recovery Project sponsors to minimize redundant
efforts and to promote consistency among the projects. In terms of construction, truck routes, truck
assignment, truck quantities, construction schedules, MPT plans and EPCs proposed for each project were
coordinated and compiled for this FEIS. These data were shared with the other Recovery Project
sponsors and provided consistency among the projects.

Cumulative Construction Impacts

Traffic delay increases are anticipated to be relatively minor and, with the exception of two (2)
intersections, are all within the tolerance of 10 seconds, an initial threshold of potential impact as defined
by NYSDOT. However, these changes would not meet the threshold for an impact and neither of the
intersections is forecast to experience a significant impact. Truck access would be maintained to all
streets affected by construction activity and the construction of the FSTC is not expected to result in
significant adverse impacts on parking conditions.



October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                    ES-37
MTA New York City Transit                                   Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

During the construction period, some station elements may accommodate diverted flows from partial or
complete closures of other station elements. The effect is that some station elements would operate with
higher congestion then projected in the 2005/2006 No Action Alternative. NYCT would develop MPT
plans that would minimize congested conditions to the greatest extent possible. Construction work would
be scheduled and performed as part of NYCT’s regular program for scheduling service diversions for
construction projects. Some customers may experience slightly longer travel times on nights and/or
weekends as a result of the construction at FSTC. Pedestrian access to, from and between all modes of
travel, including subway and bus, in the vicinity of the project would be maintained throughout the
duration of construction. Access to the subway system would be maintained during construction through
minor schedule adjustments of subway lines as is commonly done for NYCT rehabilitation projects. Most
schedule adjustments would be temporary and limited to weekends when subway volumes are low.

During construction, special accommodations would be made to not encumber ADA access on Broadway,
Fulton or Dey Streets by providing ADA compliant ramp systems and sidewalk surface treatment. It is
possible that pedestrians (and especially PATH patrons) may choose Fulton Street (between Church
Street and Broadway) and John Street (between Broadway and Nassau Street) over Dey and Fulton
Streets to travel east-west during the morning rush hour. Because economic activity in Lower Manhattan
would still be below pre-September 11 conditions in 2005/2006, it is not anticipated that any traffic
overflow to these streets would result in conditions worse than pre-September 11 conditions.

The analysis shows that, cumulatively, construction-related traffic is not expected to adversely affect
access and circulation in the vicinity of the project during construction. Implementation of the common
EPCs would further improve access and circulation above the levels estimated in the analysis. Project
specific EPCs would be investigated by NYCT in the course of developing, constructing and monitoring
the project in an effort to minimize the construction effects on access and circulation.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

With the FSTC, transit conditions and pedestrian flow inside the Facility Entry would operate at
substantially improved levels by eliminating all LOS E and F conditions through the entire Existing
Complex, resulting in a major improvement in pedestrian flow. Lower Manhattan would be supported by
a much improved subway system that is more easily navigable, safer and much more accessible. This
would result in the reduction of travel time by an estimated 900,000 hours per year for all commuters
combined using the FSTC in 2025. In particular, the FSTC would provide better accessibility for people
with disabilities, via new ADA-compliant elevators from the street to the subway system, as well as
ADA-compliant platform connections within the system. ADA access, where none now exists, would be
provided among all stations (45, AC, 23, JMZ) in one of the system’s busiest station
complexes. This would facilitate the fullest public participation in Lower Manhattan’s economic and
cultural resources, and increased ability for all to reside in Lower Manhattan.

The Dey Street Passageway is adequately sized to accommodate the substantial increase in pedestrian
traffic associated with the redevelopment of the WTC site and PATH commuters. As an unpaid
passageway, the Dey Street Passageway would benefit both patrons of the subway system and other
pedestrians traveling east or west between Church Street and Broadway and destinations beyond. The
diversion of pedestrians using the crosswalks in the No Action condition to the subsurface Dey Street
Passageway would substantially reduce the number of street-level pedestrians during the morning and
evening rush hour and thereby improve crosswalk LOS in the study area. This would also contribute to a
better flow of vehicular traffic, expected to increase in volume as a result of continued economic growth
in Lower Manhattan through 2025. As street-level pedestrian congestion would be reduced, this would
create a more pleasant and safer pedestrian environment, especially for children and people with
disabilities.




October 2004                                                                                         Executive Summary
                                                  ES-38
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

AIR QUALITY

Cumulative Construction Impacts

The analysis shows that, cumulatively, pollutant concentrations would not exceed NAAQS and de
minimis criteria for Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative. Whereas no regulatory standards exist for
PM2.5 emissions associated with construction, this FEIS utilized the values referenced in NYSDEC Policy
CP-33 as a context for analysis. Although elevated PM2.5 levels were determined, these levels can be
reduced through application of EPCs for use of ULSD fuel and appropriate engine retrofit
technology/electrification for off-road equipment. In addition to the EPCs already incorporated in the
project, other measures will be investigated by NYCT in coordination with the FTA and the other
Recovery Project sponsors in the course of developing and constructing the project, e.g., in the event
other technological advances are made, in an effort to further minimize the construction effects on air
quality.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

Operational emissions of the FSTC would be insubstantial, and the project would not contribute to 2008
or 2025 operational air quality impacts. This is evidenced by the concurrence from the Interagency
Consultation Group of agencies tracking transportation projects for air pollutant emissions effects that the
project is classified as “exempt” under regulations implementing the Clean Air Act, i.e., the project’s
emissions effects are negligible.

Operation of the FSTC would provide improved transit access to Lower Manhattan, thereby supporting
economic growth while reducing the potential environmental burden associated with the increase in
traffic typically associated with such growth. The FSTC would provide alternate non-polluting
transportation options for residents, visitors and workers. A flexible, safe, convenient and attractive transit
system in Lower Manhattan would provide the capacity needed during peak hours to provide: an easy
commute for workers to and from Lower Manhattan’s centers of commercial activity; a safe and reliable
travel mode for residents (in particular families and residents with disabilities), during all times of the day
and week; and an easily navigable system for visitors to Lower Manhattan.

In summary, it is anticipated that compared to the condition without the FSTC in 2008 and 2025, the
FSTC would have a beneficial cumulative effect on air quality in Lower Manhattan and would help
reduce any adverse effects on air quality by the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects.

NOISE AND VIBRATION

Cumulative Construction Impacts

Mobile Sources

Compared to the 2003 Existing Condition, Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would result in
decreases or no change in traffic at two (2) of the noise receptor locations due to street closures for
activities proposed under the FSTC. Additional traffic would be generated at the seven (7) other
locations, six (6) of which would result in imperceptible increase of less than one (1) dBA during the AM
peak traffic hour. Receptor Site 4 (Century 21 Department Store – Cortlandt Street entrance) would
experience a Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) traffic volume increase of almost 400 percent resulting in a
substantial increase of 6.8 dBA during the AM peak hour. Using a three (3) dBA increase as the
discernable threshold, there would be adverse airborne noise impacts from mobile sources at Site 4 during
the AM peak hour.

Compared to the pre-September 11 condition and the 2003 Existing Condition, the FSTC would result in
decreases in traffic at four (4) of the receptor locations, two (2) of which are due to street closures for
activities proposed under the FSTC. Additional traffic would be generated at the five (5) other locations,
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-39
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

all of which would result in an imperceptible increase of up to 1.6 dBA during the AM peak traffic hour.
Using a three (3) dBA increase as the discernable threshold, there would be no adverse airborne noise
impacts from mobile sources at any of the nine (9) receptor locations during the AM peak hour.

The cumulative noise and vibration analysis indicates that, during the peak construction year, traffic-
related noise level increases would be less than 1.1 dBA at eight (8) of the nine (9) receptor locations in
the study area. These locations were identified as those where the FSTC would have the greatest potential
to increase ambient noise levels and cause an impact. The one (1) receptor that would experience large
increases in construction traffic, with a corresponding increase in traffic-related noise levels, is the
Century 21 Department Store on Church Street. The projected construction traffic-related noise level
increase at this receptor is 4.7 dBA, which represents a significant increase.

Stationary Sources

Construction activities associated with other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects that contribute to noise
impacts caused by the FSTC would be limited to the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal and the WTC
Memorial and Redevelopment Plan. These projects only affect the immediate interface with the FSTC
project area at Dey Street. Areas of FSTC construction further east would be shielded by intervening
buildings from the noise contributions from these two (2) other Recovery Projects and background noise
levels.

Peak one (1)-hour Leq, eight (8)-hour Leq, and 30-day Ldn for each month in 2006 were calculated at each
of nine (9) receptor sites. Peak one (1)-hour noise levels would exceed FTA criteria of 90 dBA for
residences and hotels and 100 dBA for office and commercial at four (4) of the nine (9) sites. The eight
(8)-hour noise levels would exceed FTA criteria of 80 dBA (for residences and churches) and 85 dBA
(office/commercial) at seven (7) of the nine (9) sites. It is noted that the calculated peak one (1)-hour and
eight (8)-hour noise levels are the maximum expected noise levels at each of the receptor locations. In
addition, expected noise levels would only occur during peak construction activities, which are limited to
certain time periods and last for short periods of time, e.g. hours or days, over the entire construction
duration.

The 30-day Ldn levels would exceed FTA criteria at five (5) of the nine (9) sites using the Minimum
Distance Method. The Minimum Distance Method presents the most conservative analysis in
determining the closest point that pieces of moveable equipment could be located to the receptor.
(Stationary equipment would, in fact, be placed as far away from receptors as possible within the work
zone). In calculating noise levels using the Minimum Distance Method, several of the noise receptors
were assumed to be located at a relatively short distance from the noise generating source. This was
especially the case for noise receptors associated with the construction at the Dey Street Passageway, e.g.,
the Millenium Hotel, and the mezzanine at Fulton Street. While construction could occur as close as five
(5) feet from a building façade, it should be noted that activities would not occur continuously at such
proximities, especially for small distances (less than 20 feet). Rather, equipment at such distances would
continuously move within different areas of the work site. The Average Distance Method, therefore, was
also used to reflect the fact that actual locations of the construction equipment would move around
throughout the construction areas or zones over an extended period (e.g. 30 days). When computed using
the Average Distance Method, the 30-day Ldn levels at all nine (9) locations are substantially reduced and
would not exceed FTA criteria at any of nine (9) sites evaluated.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

To the extent that the FSTC would contribute to a reduction in traffic as a result of alternate transit
options, the operation of the FSTC may contribute to a reduction in traffic-generated noise; thereby,
ambient noise conditions for residents, workers and visitors to Lower Manhattan would be improved. The
only potential mobile noise source associated with operation of the FSTC would be the existing subway
station and subway trains. As stated in the FTA’s assessment guidelines, subway noise is generally not a
problem for surrounding sensitive receptors because the ground acts as a barrier to noise transmission.
October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-40
MTA New York City Transit                                     Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

The subway lines and stations are underground and fully covered, with the exception of ventilation
gratings and shafts. The project alternatives would not result in substantial increase or change in train
operations, and operational noise and vibration impacts are not anticipated.

Although some noise impacts could occur during operation of rooftop HVAC equipment, affecting 15
John Street and 144 Fulton Street, measures would be employed to minimize such impacts and equipment
would be designed to minimize audible noise at street-level. As part of ongoing design, opportunities are
being explored to mitigate impacts, including use of quieter equipment types, noise barriers, and window
replacement/insulation. Retail operations would be similar to those existing and would not substantially
change existing noise conditions. Operation of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects would occur
at a distance too far from the FSTC to result in cumulative noise impacts during operation. The HVAC
and mechanical systems would also be located in buildings that would be structurally designed to
minimize vibration to adjacent uses and buildings. No cumulative adverse effects on noise and vibration
conditions from stationary sources would be expected with operation of the FSTC.

CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES

Cumulative Construction Impacts

Although the potential for archaeological resources was identified within portions of the project’s
construction zone, it is not anticipated that the project would contribute to cumulative construction effects
on archaeological resources. None of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects has the potential to
affect the same archaeological resources that may be affected by the FSTC. MTA NYCT is currently
consulting with SHPO and the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding
appropriate measures to address archaeological resources that may be present.

Noise and Vibration

With regard to historic resources, some historic structures in the project vicinity could experience
cumulative impacts arising from construction-related ground vibrations associated with simultaneous or
consecutive construction projects. Some of these structures will also incur noise impacts as a result of
cumulative construction noise. Vibration associated with construction truck traffic for the FSTC, in
combination with construction truck traffic for the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects, is not
anticipated to affect historic and cultural resources.

Access and Circulation

Pedestrian access to, from and among all modes of travel, including subway and bus, in the vicinity of the
project would be maintained throughout the duration of construction. In addition, pedestrian access to
major destinations in the vicinity of the project, including historic and cultural resources, would also be
maintained. Therefore, access to cultural and historic resources in the project vicinity is not expected to
be adversely affected during the construction period.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

During operation, the FSTC is not anticipated to adversely affect any cultural resources in the area. The
Corbin Building under either of the Build Alternatives would have been either avoided (Alternative 9) or
actively preserved (the Preferred Alternative) through an adaptive reuse program that would restore the
visibility of the building’s defining elements to the public. Under either Build Alternative, potential
adverse effects to any cultural resources within the APE will be resolved through a PA among the SHPO,
FTA, MTA, and ACHP. Operation of the FSTC is anticipated to result in improved access to cultural
resources in Lower Manhattan, including the Corbin Building and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic
District, thereby contributing to a greater enjoyment of these resources. In the Preferred Alternative, the
direct connection provided through the Corbin Building between the FSTC and John Street and, thus, the
historic district is an incremental and unique benefit of this alternative.
October 2004                                                                                           Executive Summary
                                                    ES-41
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS

Cumulative Construction Impacts

The Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects with the highest potential to have cumulative economic impacts
in combination with the FSTC are the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, the WTC Memorial and
Redevelopment Plan, and the Fulton Corridor Revitalization Study. Of these projects, the latter is still
under study by LMDC. None of the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects have the potential to
directly affect the local retail and other revenue-generating land uses that could be affected by the FSTC.
Similarly, the FSTC does not have the potential to have cumulative construction-related business and
economic impacts on the other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects.

The components of the FSTC that have the potential to overlap with activities at the WTC site are: the
construction of the Dey Street Passageway between Broadway and Church Street and the widening of the
AC mezzanine at Fulton Street, between Broadway and Nassau Street. The closure of Dey Street and
the closure of Fulton Street during construction would affect deliveries to businesses along these streets,
e.g., to the Century 21 department store loading area on Dey Street, although emergency and destination
delivery access would be maintained. Access to Century 21 could also be affected by construction truck
traffic associated with the FSTC, the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal, and the WTC Memorial and
Redevelopment Plan as well as the proposed reconstruction of Broadway and Church Street by
NYCDOT. Construction activities associated with the relocation of utilities along the east side of Church
Street, between Dey Street and Fulton Street, would temporarily affect vehicular access and taxi drop-off
to the front entrance of the Millenium Hotel, although pedestrian access would be maintained.

To address the potential for cumulative construction impacts to adjacent properties, the construction plan
for the FSTC would include MPT Plans and would be coordinated by NYCT with NYCDOT, PANYNJ
and LMDC. Coordination with economic development interests on maintaining the attractiveness of
Lower Manhattan as a place to live, work and recreate, while maintaining a level of accessibility
commensurate with that attractiveness, would serve to minimize cumulative business and economic
effects during the construction period.

Cumulative Operational Impacts

The FSTC would involve the demolition of five (5) existing buildings and the relocation of business
tenants. As such, land use on the site (except for 192 Broadway) would change from a mixture of
commercial and institutional space with street-level retail establishments, to a dedicated public space
containing transit facilities that incorporates new retail and public spaces. Between the two (2) Build
Alternatives, the Preferred Alternative would provide a greater contribution to revitalization and
consistency with stated Federal, State and City public policies promoting revitalization, as it would also
make the Corbin Building a more attractive key cultural resource to the public through rehabilitation and
revitalization, both in terms of access and visibility. In addition, the Preferred Alternative would connect
FSTC with three (3) block faces, as opposed to two (2) under Alternative 9. The higher visibility and
superior accessibility of the FSTC under the Preferred Alternative would make the vicinity of the FSTC
more attractive for economic activity.

Although the City property tax base would be reduced by the displacement of businesses in the Build
Alternatives, it is expected that most businesses would relocate within the City. As a result there would be
little or no loss in retail and business tax revenues. The FSTC would provide additional tax revenues from
the new retail businesses on the site.

Operation of the FSTC would be directly responsive to Federal, State, and City-stated public policy in
that it would improve accessibility to Lower Manhattan and facilitate the movement of pedestrians
between destinations within Lower Manhattan. Operation of the FSTC from 2008 onward would provide
immediate benefits in terms of wayfinding and mobility to and within Lower Manhattan, both of which
are expected to immediately contribute to the revitalization of Lower Manhattan and may help offset
October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-42
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

some of the temporary construction impacts of other Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects. In addition,
operation of the Dey Street Passageway would provide an underpass beneath the busy Broadway/Dey
Street intersection and provide commuters immediately with the benefits of improved pedestrian access to
destinations east of Broadway, thereby contributing to the revitalization of the business environment. This
would also contribute to a better flow of vehicular traffic, expected to increase in volume as a result of
continued economic growth in Lower Manhattan through 2025. As street-level pedestrian congestion
would be reduced, this would create a more pleasant and safer pedestrian environment, especially for
children and people with disabilities.

ES.11 COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Resources that would be irreversibly and irretrievably committed to the FSTC include construction
materials, energy, labor, funds and land. However, based on social and economic studies undertaken for
the analysis of potential impacts as a result of the FSTC, these are not considered to be in limited supply.
Thus, the use of such resources in the construction of the FSTC would not adversely impact the
availability of such resources for other projects both now and in the future.

Development of the FSTC would result in a temporary increase in energy and fuel consumption during
construction. The operation of the FSTC may result in a slight increase in energy consumption (due to
HVAC and operational needs) compared to the No Action Alternative but would be expected to result in a
decrease in energy consumption, through continued transit use over time. Archaeological deposits or
features also may be found in the study area, and the FSTC could result in the irreversible and
irretrievable commitment of these resources. MTA NYCT is currently consulting with SHPO and the
New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding appropriate measures to address
archaeological resources that may be present.

Overall, the resources used to construct and operate the FSTC would be committed to benefit residents,
visitors, and commuters and support economic recovery within Lower Manhattan, pursuant to established
public policy. The commitment of these resources would also benefit other residents of the State and
region by an improved transportation system and from the contribution of the FSTC to the revitalization
of Lower Manhattan. The FSTC would offer improved accessibility and savings in travel time,
improvements to the Existing Complex, reduced train crowding and improved operational flexibility of
existing subway lines. There are no other known resources that would be committed as a result of the
construction of the FSTC.

ES.12 SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
A Section 4(f) Evaluation has been prepared for the project pursuant to Federal regulations contained in
23 C.F.R. 771.135 that implement Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation Act of
1966. A Section 4(f) Evaluation is required for any federally funded transportation project if the project
proposes to use property from a publicly-owned park, recreation area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge area or
any significant historic site. The Secretary of Transportation may approve a transportation program or
project requiring the use of Section 4(f) land only if:

     •    There is no prudent and feasible alternative to using that land; and,
     •    The program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation
          area, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or historic site resulting from the use.

The FSTC is located in an area which contains archaeological potential, and also contains several
significant historic sites, as defined by the Section 4(f) regulations. Therefore, the Section 4(f) Evaluation
has been prepared to evaluate the potential use of these resources by the FSTC.

Use of Section 4(f) land occurs when:


October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                    ES-43
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

     •    Land from a Section 4(f) property is permanently incorporated into a transportation project;
     •    There is a temporary occupancy of Section 4(f) land that is adverse; or,
     •    There is a constructive use of land, i.e., when the project’s proximity impacts are so severe that
          the Section 4(f) property is substantially impaired.

The Section 4(f) evaluation identified that seven (7) historic properties and one (1) historic district located
within the APE meet the criteria for potential use. These Section 4(f) resources are: the Corbin Building;
the 45 Fulton Street Subway Station; the former American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T)
Building; the Bennett Building; the former East River Savings Bank; the St. Paul’s Chapel and
Graveyard; the WTC site; and the John Street-Maiden Lane Historic District. In addition, there is the
potential for permanent use of historic archaeological resources: at the northeast corner of the intersection
of Dey and Church Streets, along the eastern sidewalk of Church Street, north and south of Dey Street;
Dey Street, under the sidewalks; Cortland Street, west of Broadway; Maiden Lane, east of Broadway;
Fulton Street, between Broadway and William Street; William Street, between Ann Street and John
Street; and John Street, east of William Street, as described in the Phase 1A Archaeological Study. These
properties were determined in consultation with NYSOPRHP, the SHPO, and the New York City LPC.

Following are conclusions about the use of Section 4(f) resources associated with the FSTC project. A
summary overview of the Section 4(f) use for all historic resources is presented in Table ES-2.

TEMPORARY USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

The Corbin Building, Fulton Street Station, former AT&T Building and WTC site would be permanently
used, so temporary use does not apply to them. No temporary use would occur to the other Section 4(f)
resources, since:

     •    They would not be occupied;
     •    The duration of occupancy of Section 4(f) resources would be less than the time needed for
          construction of the project;
     •    The scope of work to Section 4(f) resources, in terms of the nature and magnitude of the work,
          would be minor;
     •    There would be no resulting adverse impacts to the Section 4(f) resources; and,
     •    There would be no change in the Section 4(f) resource ownership.




October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-44
MTA New York City Transit                                                                                                                   Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation



                                              Table ES-2
            Historic Sites Located in the FSTC Historic Properties Area of Potential Effect
         (APE) and their Potential Use (for purposes of Section 4(f)) Under FSTC Alternatives

                                                                               No Action                                                                                                                          The Preferred
                                                                                                                                                    Alternative 9
                                                                               Alternative                                                                                                                         Alternative




                                                               Potential Permanent




                                                                                                                              Potential Permanent




                                                                                                                                                                                                  Potential Permanent
                    on National Register
                    Listed or considered




                                                                                     Potential Temporary




                                                                                                                                                         Potential Temporary




                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Potential Temporary
                    eligible for inclusion

                                             NYC Landmark or




                                                                                                           Constructive use




                                                                                                                                                                               Constructive use




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Constructive use
                                              proposed NYC
                                                Landmark




                                                                                                              Potential




                                                                                                                                                                                  Potential




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Potential
                                                                       use


                                                                                             use




                                                                                                                                      use



                                                                                                                                                                 use




                                                                                                                                                                                                          use



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                use
    Corbin
                           X                                   N/A                   N/A                   N/A                Yes                       None                   None               Yes                   None                  None
    Building
  Fulton Street
                           X                      X            N/A                   N/A                   N/A                Yes                       None                   None               Yes                   None                  None
  45 Station
 Former AT&T
                                                               N/A                   N/A                   N/A                Yes                       None                   None               Yes                   None                  None
   Building                X
    Bennett
                           X                      X            N/A                   N/A                   N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
    Building
  Former East
 River Savings     X               N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
      Bank
   St. Paul’s
                   X       X       N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
     Chapel
  John Street-
  Maiden Lane
                   X       X       N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
    Historic
     District
  Keuffel Esser
                           X       N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
    Building
     Royal
   Insurance               X       N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                None                      None                   None               None                  None                  None
    Building
   WTC site        X               N/A       N/A                                                           N/A                Yes                       None                   None               Yes                   None                  None
 Source: The Louis Berger Group, Inc., 2004.

CONSTRUCTIVE USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

No constructive use of Section 4(f) resources would occur because potential proximity impacts of the
project would be minimized or avoided so as not to cause substantial impairment of the Section 4(f)
resources, as follows:
     •    A quiet setting is not a generally recognized feature or attribute of the Section 4(f) resources that
          could be affected by the project; therefore, construction-related noise level increases associated
          with the project would not substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of Section 4(f)
          resources;
     •    Views of Section 4(f) resources would not be obstructed or eliminated and because of the
          provisions of the PA, its setting would not be visually impacted; therefore, the aesthetic quality of
          the Section 4(f) resources would not be substantially impaired;
     •    Under the Preferred Alternative, access to the Corbin Building would be restricted during the
          construction period; however, this is a temporary restriction that does not diminish the utility of
          this resource, and access would be restored following construction;


October 2004                                                                                                                                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                                                                                  ES-45
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

     •    Through the implementation of a CEPP, potential construction-related vibration impacts would be
          minimized or avoided, such that impairment of the Section 4(f) resources or their structural
          integrity and utility would not occur; and,
     •    There is no wildlife or waterfowl refuge adjacent to the project; therefore, this constructive use
          criterion does not apply.

PERMANENT USE OF SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

Under Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative, four (4) Section 4(f) historic resources would be
permanently used (i.e., permanently incorporated) by the FSTC project. These resources include the
Corbin Building, the Fulton Street 45 Station, the former AT&T Building and the WTC site. In
addition, permanent use of historic archaeological resources in portions of the study area may also occur
as a result of the project. The evaluation of alternatives that would avoid use of these resources found that
none of the alternatives are prudent and feasible. Concurrence with this finding was provided by the
Department of the Interior (DOI), in a letter dated June 29 2004, in which the DOI confirmed that there
were no prudent and feasible alternatives to the Proposed Action. The DOI also agreed with the proposed
measures to minimize harm, as presented in this FEIS, on the condition that such measures were
consistent with the PA (included as Chapter 11-A in this FEIS).

ES.13 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION AND OTHER PLANNED
      IMPACT REDUCTION ACTIONS
A range of mitigation measures are proposed or being evaluated for the project’s significant impacts.
Those impacts are predominantly associated with construction, rather than operation, of the proposed
project and by their nature are temporary. All mitigation measures would be organized into a CEPP that
would be applied to all aspects of planned project construction and operation. This CEPP would be
implemented through NYCT and coordinated with pertinent agencies, and sponsors of other Lower
Manhattan Recovery Projects. The CEPP is described in the Environmental Analysis Framework for
Federal Transportation Recovery Projects in Lower Manhattan (October 2003) committed to by the
NYSDOT, NYCT, PANYNJ and FTA. The measures are listed briefly below, organized by subject area.
Table ES-3 at the end of this Executive Summary provides a summary of impacts and planned actions,
including mitigation measures, for the Proposed Action by resource category. NYCT is committed to
implementing proposed mitigation measures and EPCs. These measures are being developed in more
detail as the design proceeds and will be incorporated into the construction specifications for the project.
The CEPP and an example of the environmental measures which could be included in the specifications
are included in Appendix C.

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION

     •    During construction, strategic construction sequencing would be used by NYCT to reduce
          impacts to the patrons of the stations by providing new pedestrian pathways before the existing
          ones are removed. Construction would be advanced early in those areas that are not currently well
          utilized in order to provide refuge for passengers away from necessary construction in the
          congested areas of the station in later stages. General station rehabilitation would also be
          advanced where possible to provide tangible improvements to the users of the station at the
          earliest possible time to offset the unavoidable inconveniences associated with the construction of
          larger project elements.

     •    MPT plans would be developed by NYCT for the project in coordination with NYCDOT to
          manage traffic and minimize the impact on vehicular and pedestrian flows during construction.
          These plans would be coordinated with the plans developed by LMDC for the Memorial and
          Redevelopment of the WTC site and the PANYNJ for the Permanent WTC PATH Terminal. The
          NYCDDC street reconstruction projects and the NYSDOT Route 9A Reconstruction south of
          Chambers Street would also have a direct effect on the traffic volumes and traffic patterns.
          NYCDOT approvals for vehicular travel lane and sidewalk closures would take into account all
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-46
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

          of the construction projects that would be occurring simultaneously in Lower Manhattan. NYCT
          is continuing to refine the MPT plans in coordination with NYCDOT. Updated draft MPT Plans
          are included in Appendix C.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

     •    To minimize any potential impacts, a “Pedestrian Way-Finding Plan” would be prepared and
          implemented during construction. Appropriate signage for businesses and civic amenities would
          be added and public awareness promoted through mechanisms such as signage, telephone hotline,
          and Web site updates. A Visitor Center/Project Information Office would be established during
          construction, with sensitivity to local cultural resources and visual resources. Public information
          outlets that would receive and provide current information about access during construction
          would be identified, and all property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of
          the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in
          accordance with the New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law.

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND PARKLANDS

     •    The CEPP would be implemented to minimize construction impacts on resources including public
          open space and parklands. Dust related to construction would be controlled through, among other
          measures: spraying of a suppressing agent on dust pile (non-hazardous, biodegradable);
          containment of fugitive dust; adjustment for meteorological conditions as appropriate; erection of
          site barriers; enforcement of strict containment guidelines; and proactive monitoring. A draft of
          the CEPP and an example of construction specifications are included in Appendix C.

URBAN DESIGN AND VISUAL RESOURCES

     •    NYCT will maintain continued coordination among Recovery Projects to avoid or minimize
          interruption in access and views to cultural sites and visual resources. Design objectives to
          maximize the enhancement of visual resources and make a positive contribution to urban design
          and aesthetics would be incorporated into the project engineering. Effects on key viewsheds and
          visual resources would be minimized through sensitive location and design of sidewalk bridging.
          The presence and concurrent use of heavy equipment and construction activities within key
          viewsheds would be managed through careful sequencing and scheduling of construction
          activities. A Pedestrian and Vehicular Access, Circulation, Maintenance and Protection Plan
          would be prepared for implementation throughout the construction zone. Sufficient alternative
          street, building, and station access during the construction period would be maintained. Baselines
          for vehicular and pedestrian traffic levels of service ensuring east-west connectivity would be
          developed and monitored.

     •    A “Pedestrian Way-Finding Plan” would be implemented during construction. Appropriate
          signage for businesses and civic amenities would be added and public awareness promoted
          through mechanisms such as signage, telephone hotline and Web site updates. A Visitor
          Center/Project Information Office would be established during construction, with sensitivity to
          local cultural resources and visual resources. Public information outlets that would receive and
          provide current information about access during construction would be identified.

     •    The CEPP would be implemented to minimize construction impacts. Dust related to construction
          will be controlled through, among other things, spraying of a suppressing agent on dust pile (non-
          hazardous, biodegradable); containment of fugitive dust; adjustment for meteorological
          conditions as appropriate; erection of site barriers; enforcement of strict containment guidelines;
          and proactive monitoring. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications are
          included in Appendix C.



October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-47
MTA New York City Transit                                       Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION

     •    All property acquisition would be undertaken within the framework of the Federal Uniform
          Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act and in accordance with the
          New York State Eminent Domain Procedure Law.
     •    Under the Build Alternatives, it is anticipated that most relocated businesses would be successful
          in finding suitable alternative space near their current locations. Most relocating businesses are
          likely to be successful in finding suitable alternative space near their current locations because the
          inventory of vacant office, retail, warehouse, and other commercial space in Lower Manhattan is
          anticipated to be large enough to accommodate the needs of most displaced businesses. The
          financial burdens associated with relocation would be addressed by NYCT within the framework
          of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

     •    A milestone review process would be developed and implemented in coordination with SHPO
          and LPC, in which the ultimate treatment and use of the Corbin Building is determined through
          consideration of the property’s historic character and of the construction and operational
          feasibility of possible treatment and use options. Consultation with the SHPO would continue
          concerning: proposed alterations to the historic 45 Fulton Street Station and development of
          designs and specifications consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
          Rehabilitation, including appropriate re-use of historic decorative elements such as wall finishes,
          railings and other features of the street-level entrances.

     •    The CEPP would be developed to avoid construction impacts on potentially vulnerable historic
          buildings within 90 feet of the construction activities. Special provisions would be necessary for
          the Corbin Building because it directly abuts the area in which deconstruction and construction
          would occur, and is physically attached to a building that would be removed. The CEPP would
          include protective measures such as monitoring of historic buildings during construction to detect
          vibration or other physical impacts. A draft of the CEPP and an example of construction
          specifications are included in Appendix C.

     •    In anticipation of potential identification of archaeological resources, and/or possible
          modifications to the designs for the FSTC, a CRMP, including an Emergency Action Program
          (EAP) to address any potential archaeological impacts, within the current archaeological APE and
          also those which may arise should the current APE be modified as a result of design changes,
          would be developed and implemented. This would include the requirement of an archaeologist
          certified by the Register of Professional Archeologists (RPA) to be retained on the FSTC
          engineering team.

AIR QUALITY

     •    The ambient air quality impact analysis shows that the proposed FSTC construction activities in
          Lower Manhattan for both Alternative 9 and the Preferred Alternative would not exceed the
          NAAQS for CO (one (1)-hour and eight (8)-hour), and SO2 (three (3)-hour, 24-hour, and annual
          average). With the implementation of the NYCT policy of the combined use of ULSD fuel and
          diesel engine retrofit technology, the predicted PM and NO2 concentration in the vicinity of the
          project during construction would be within NAAQS standards and available guidance.

     •    On-site emission reduction measures would also include dust control related to the construction
          site through a soil erosion sediment control plan that includes: spraying of a (non-hazardous,
          biodegradable) suppressing agent on dust piles; containment of fugitive dust and adjustment of
          work for meteorological conditions as appropriate. ULSD fuel and retrofit technology in
          particular heavy-duty engines and off-road construction vehicles would be utilized during the
          construction of the FSTC. Although the EPCs require the use of ULSD for off-road construction
          equipment 60HP and above, NYCT is committed to the use of ULSD for equipment of 50HP and
October 2004                                                                                             Executive Summary
                                                      ES-48
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

          above, consistent with the requirements of the Coordinated Construction Act for Lower
          Manhattan. Diesel engine retrofit technology will be required in off-road equipment to further
          reduce emissions. Modeling of air quality impacts conducted prior to the enactment of the
          Coordinated Construction Act in July 2004 assumed the use of ULSD fuel for nonroad engines 60
          HP and above, and therefore did not account for the additional air quality benefits associated with
          the use of ULSD for nonroad vehicles between 50 HP and 60 HP. In accordance with the
          Coordinated Construction Act for Lower Manhattan, NYCT will require that non-road vehicles of
          50 HP and above are retrofitted with Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC), Diesel Particulate Filters
          (DPF) or technology that achieves lowest particulate matter emissions. Based on currently
          available data, Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) will be the preferred retrofit technology, with
          Diesel Oxidation Catalyst (DOC) as a fallback when the use of DPF is not practicable.

     •    The engine emission removal efficiencies applied to diesel engines due to retrofit technologies
          would be achieved through on-site enforcement of EPA’s regulations when project construction
          work begins to achieve emission reduction of at least 50 percent for CO emissions. EPA is
          proposing new emission standards for diesel engines used in construction, agricultural and
          industrial operations.

     •    In addition to the above, other EPCs would continue to be investigated by NYCT in coordination
          with the FTA and the other Recovery Project sponsors in the course of design and construction of
          the FSTC; that is, in the event other technological advances are made, an effort to minimize
          construction effects on air quality using such technologies would be appropriately considered. A
          draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize air quality impacts
          is included in Appendix C.

NOISE AND VIBRATION

     •    Measures to mitigate airborne construction noise include construction sequencing to reduce noise
          impacts, use of alternative construction methods (such as using special low noise emission level
          equipment, and selecting and specifying quieter demolition methods), project layout approaches
          such as constructing temporary noise barriers, placing construction equipment farther from noise-
          sensitive receptors, and constructing walled enclosures/sheds around especially noisy activities
          such as pavement breaking. Other potential measures include the installation of silencers on
          construction equipment to reduce noise levels; the use of electrically operated equipment; the use
          of soil lining inside aluminum carrying cases to reduce rock impact noise during truck
          load/unloading operations; the use of drive-through street-level truck enclosures for truck loading
          and unloading; the use of sheds/enclosures at concrete pump sites during concrete truck
          unloading; and, the placement of most loading/unloading inside the excavated areas and away
          from areas at street-level, if possible.

     •    Different construction methods could be used to mitigate and further minimize vibration and
          ground-borne noise during construction. These include, where feasible, such measures as
          avoiding impact pile driving and equipment with high vibratory levels in vibration-sensitive
          areas, using non-impact construction technology, instituting special control measures to reduce
          the transmission of high vibratory levels to vibration-sensitive areas, etc. Various standard
          mitigation techniques are already given in standard NYCT construction specifications. Project
          construction engineers are exploring alternative construction techniques and special low-impact
          equipment.

     •    A number of controls would be implemented with respect to mitigation of vibration during
          construction. A preconstruction survey of any structure or use (e.g., operation of vibration-
          sensitive equipment such as laser eye surgery tools) likely to be adversely affected by the
          construction activities would be performed and thresholds or limiting values would be established
          that take into account each structure’s or use’s ability to withstand the loads and displacements
          due to construction vibrations. NYCT, through its contractors, would also meet with medical
October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-49
MTA New York City Transit                                        Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

          facilities or other users of especially sensitive equipment prior to construction to survey them
          regarding their special needs and then schedule construction activities appropriately. Detailed
          construction specifications that impose reasonable acceptance criteria would be included in
          construction contracts.

     •    A project-wide vibration monitoring program would also be developed and implemented to
          monitor and identify vibration levels from construction activities at nearby sensitive receptors.
          This program would be reflected in the CEPP. A complaint response procedure would be
          implemented to promptly address community concerns and implement additional control methods
          where necessary. In addition, in advance of certain activities that are likely to result in vibrations,
          NYCT and its contractors would conduct extensive outreach to those in the surrounding blocks
          that could be affected. Additionally, vibration control plans would be developed and best
          management practices to limit vibration would be employed in sensitive areas, depending on the
          construction method required.

     •    To avoid architectural damage (e.g., cracked plaster) to extremely fragile buildings within 90 feet
          of the construction work, deep saw cuts would be made between areas of pavement breaking and
          the sidewalk areas in front of buildings. With this technique, ground-borne vibration levels should
          be below the impact criteria at the foundations of most buildings and no damage is anticipated.
          Additionally, where practical, concrete cutters would be used on pavement surfaces instead of
          pavement breakers.

     •    The CEPP would account for the requirements laid out in the “New York City Department of
          Buildings Technical Policy and Procedure Notice (PPN) #10/88,” concerning procedures for
          avoidance of damage to historic structures from adjacent construction. The PPN defines an
          adjacent historic structure as being contiguous to or within a lateral distance of 90 feet from a lot
          under development or alteration. These measures, to be included as part of the CEPP plan for
          historic resources, would include the following:
              o Inspect and report on current foundation and structural conditions of any historic
                   resources;
              o Establish a vibration monitoring program to measure vertical and lateral movement and
                   vibration to the historic structures within 150 feet of construction activities. Details as to
                   the frequency and duration of the vibration monitoring program would be determined as
                   part of the project’s ongoing consultation process with the State Historic Preservation
                   Office;
              o Establish and monitor construction methods to limit vibrations to levels that would not
                   cause structural damage to the historic structures, as determined by the condition survey;
                   and,
              o Issue “stop work” orders to the construction contractor, as required, to prevent damage to
                   the structures, based on any vibration levels that exceed the design criteria in the lateral
                   or vertical direction. Work would not begin again until the steps proposed to stabilize
                   and/or prevent further damage to the designated buildings were approved.

     •    Measures to mitigate operational noise impacts associated with HVAC and mechanical
          equipment located within the roof area of the Entry Facility would include the use of silencers
          and/or enclosures to minimize these impacts. As further mitigation is expected to be necessary to
          achieve compliance with the New York City Noise Code, as part of ongoing design, opportunities
          are being explored to avoid or mitigate impacts. These include investigation of the technical
          feasibility of using quieter equipment types, noise barriers and window replacement/insulation.

     •    The draft of the CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize noise and
          vibration impacts is included in Appendix C. In addition, the executed PA is included in Chapter
          11.


October 2004                                                                                              Executive Summary
                                                      ES-50
MTA New York City Transit                                      Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

INFRASTRUCTURE, ENERGY AND SOLID WASTE

     •    Utility relocation activities will be subject to the CEPP to minimize community disruption. The
          draft CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize infrastructure, energy and
          solid waste impacts are included in Appendix C.

NATURAL RESOURCES

     •    Soil erosion and run-off prevention measures, pursuant to the CEPP (see Appendix C), would be
          developed and implemented in accordance with “New York Standards and Specifications for
          Erosion and Sediment Control” published by the Empire State Soil and Water Conservation
          Society. The erosion and run-off prevention measures would include the use of hay bales and/or
          silt screens to capture run-off prior to entering sewer catch basins, grading exposed soils on the
          project site away from the perimeter, and covering exposed soil with gravel or other materials to
          limit run-off.

     •    Dewatering of excavations would be performed in a manner that would limit the draw-down of
          groundwater in the vicinity of the project site through the selection of shoring or sheeting
          methods that limit the influx of groundwater into the excavation. If localized groundwater draw-
          down occurs, and has the potential to result in the settlement of structures, the Contractor would
          perform stabilization measures, such as injecting grout beneath the structure’s foundation, prior to
          dewatering. Prior to implementation, stabilization measures developed by a licensed Professional
          Engineer would be presented to NYCT for review and acceptance. NYCT would notify the
          affected property owner prior to authorizing the Contractor to proceed. Once construction is
          completed, groundwater levels and flow direction would return to the pre-construction state.

CONTAMINATED MATERIALS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT

     •    Prior to building deconstruction/renovation and station rehabilitations, comprehensive surveys for
          asbestos, lead-based paint, PCB-containing equipment and mercury-containing bulbs and
          equipment would be undertaken to identify the locations and quantities of such materials.

     •    Asbestos containing materials would be properly removed from the buildings and subway stations
          prior to deconstruction and rehabilitation, thereby minimizing the potential for human exposure
          during construction. Construction activities that have the potential to generate lead-containing
          dust or vapors would be evaluated through the performance of a lead exposure assessment and, if
          required, the affected surfaces would be de-leaded prior to construction. Air exposure monitoring
          for lead particulates would be conducted during building deconstruction/renovation and station
          rehabilitation to monitor worker and public exposure to lead-containing dust. Dust controls
          would be employed during deconstruction activities to limit public and worker exposure. PCB-
          containing equipment and mercury-containing light fixtures and equipment would be properly
          removed prior to building deconstruction/ renovation and station rehabilitations.

     •    Prior to construction, soil, soil gas and groundwater sampling and analysis would be conducted,
          as appropriate, in areas of proposed excavation to more fully assess the types and extent of
          contamination present. Based on the sampling and analysis investigation, a CEPP plan to manage
          such materials would be developed. The following related elements of the CEPP would be
          developed and implemented: HASP; Soil and Contaminated Materials Management Plan; Soil
          Gas Management Plan; and Groundwater Management Plan. Such plans would be developed by
          the Contractor for acceptance by NYCT to limit the potential for worker and public contact with
          any contamination found in the soil, soil gas, or groundwater. Oversight would be provided by
          NYCT to ensure that the measures specified in the CEPP are implemented.




October 2004                                                                                            Executive Summary
                                                     ES-51
MTA New York City Transit                                    Fulton Street Transit Center FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation

     •    Contaminated material encountered during excavation activity would be handled, transported, and
          disposed of according to all applicable Federal, State and local rules and regulations, and in
          accordance with the various project-specific plans listed above.

     •    The draft CEPP and an example of construction specifications to minimize impacts associated
          with contaminated materials and waste management and solid waste impacts is included in
          Appendix C.

COASTAL ZONE

     •    Materials would undergo appropriate pre-treatment activities prior to discharge into the sewer
          system. Contaminated materials would be managed, remediated and/or disposed of in accordance
          with all laws and regulations and prevented from entering coastal systems.

SAFETY

     •    HASPs for each construction contract would be implemented as part of the CEPP. The draft
          CEPP and an example of construction specifications to ensure safety is included in Appendix C.




October 2004                                                                                          Executive Summary
                                                   ES-52
                                                                                                                                         Table ES-3
                                                                                                                 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action


Resource Area                                   No Action Alternative                                                                              Alternative 9                                                             Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative                                Planned Action Common to Build
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Alternatives
                              Construction                                    Operation                                     Construction                                    Operation                                   Construction                                    Operation
                 Increased vehicular congestion, increase                                                     MPT plans are anticipated to minimize the                                                   MPT plans are anticipated to minimize the
  Traffic and                                                 Increased vehicular congestion, increase                                                          Improved flow of vehicular traffic,                                                         Improved flow of vehicular traffic,
                 in street-level pedestrian congestion, and                                                      effect of construction-related traffic,                                                     effect of construction-related traffic,
Transportation                                                in street-level pedestrian congestion, and                                                       reduction in street-level pedestrian                                                        reduction in street-level pedestrian          Maintenance and Protection of Traffic
                       poor wayfinding and pedestrian                                                         roadway closures, pedestrian diversions,                                                    roadway closures, pedestrian diversions,
                                                                    poor wayfinding and pedestrian                                                          congestion, and improved wayfinding and                                                     congestion, and improved wayfinding and                    (MPT) Plans.
                    congestion in the Existing Complex.                                                       and station element closures with respect                                                   and station element closures with respect
                                                                 congestion in the Existing Complex.                                                         pedestrian flow in the FSTC Complex.                                                        pedestrian flow in the FSTC Complex.
                                                                                                                      to access and circulation.                                                                  to access and circulation.
                              Construction                                    Operation                                     Construction                                    Operation                                   Construction                                    Operation
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Substantially advances recovery by
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         creating visible transit presence, better
                                                                                                                                                                                                           Five (5) buildings removed: (Four (4) at      transit efficiency and patron amenities.
                                                                                                               Five (5) buildings removed: (Four (4) at         Substantially advances recovery by
                                                                                                                                                                                                            Entry Facility; One (1) on Dey Street).         Some retail incorporated in FSTC
                                                                                                                Entry Facility; One (1) on Dey Street).       creating visible transit presence, better
                                                                                                                                                                                                           Corbin Building converted to public use.       providing resources and tax benefits.
                                                                                                               Approx 25 restaurant/retail and 75 office      transit efficiency and patron amenities.
 Social and                                                       Does not contribute further to Lower                                                                                                     Approx 25 restaurant/retail and 75 office    FSTC is a major public use, strengthens
                                                                                                                         businesses relocated.                   Some retail incorporated in FSTC
 Economic                                                     Manhattan recovery, Fulton Street corridor                                                                                                             businesses relocated.                 Fulton Street and surrounding area;          Appropriate Compensation pursuant to
                                                                                                              Approx 1300 construction jobs created for        providing resources and tax benefits.
 Conditions                    No Impacts.                    improvements, employment and tax base                                                                                                       Approx 1300 construction jobs created for       supports job growth and tax revenue           Federal and State Law. Signage and
                                                                                                                             four (4) years.                 FSTC is a major public use, strengthens
                                                               growth or strengthening of the economy.                                                                                                                   four (4) years.                 growth. Beneficial public transit project,     other pedestrian protection measures.
                                                                                                              Property tax base generating $1.0 million         Fulton Street and surrounding area;
                                                               Little or no effect on community facilities.                                                                                               Property tax base generating $1.2 million     contributes to community life. Opens the
                                                                                                              per year is lost; no impact to other taxes.      supports job growth and tax revenue
                                                                                                                                                                                                          per year is lost; no impact to other taxes.   historic Corbin Building to public use and
                                                                                                               Some disruption to community life near           growth. As a beneficial public transit
                                                                                                                                                                                                           Some disruption to community life near         maintains its identity in perpetuity. The
                                                                                                                          FSTC construction.                   project, contributes to community life.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      FSTC construction.                  Corbin Building would also anchor the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         northwest corner of the Historic District
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     with public access.
                              Construction                                    Operation                                     Construction                                    Operation                                   Construction                                    Operation
                                                                                                                       No use of public parks.                                                                     No use of public parks.
                                                                                                              Construction of FSTC entries in sidewalks       Improved access to existing and new         Construction of FSTC entries in sidewalks       Improved access to existing and new
 Public Open                                                                                                    at One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church                        open spaces.                      at One Liberty Plaza and 55 Church                        open spaces.                      Construction activities will be limited in
  Space and                                                     No impact or benefit to existing or new                     Street Plaza.                    Small FSTC entries in One Liberty Plaza                    Street Plaza.                    Small FSTC entries in One Liberty Plaza       extent and duration wherever possible. A
  Parklands                    No Impacts.
                                                                               parks.                          Construction work areas and vehicles in             and 55 Church Street Plaza.             Construction work areas and vehicles in             and 55 Church Street Plaza.              CEPP will be implemented to minimize
                                                                                                              daytime pedestrian zones on Fulton, John      Improved conditions in daytime pedestrian     daytime pedestrian zones on Fulton, John      Improved conditions in daytime pedestrian                      impacts.
                                                                                                              and Nassau Streets. Limited construction          zones due to reduced congestion.          and Nassau Streets. Limited construction          zones due to reduced congestion.
                                                                                                                           on John Street.                                                                             on John Street.
                              Construction                                    Operation                                     Construction                                    Operation                                   Construction                                    Operation
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          by strengthening Fulton Street corridor
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           and improving east-west connections
                                                                                                                                                            Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery                                                      to/from WTC; Congestion reduced, and
                                                                                                                                                            by strengthening the Fulton Street corridor     Temporary disruption to wayfinding and      amenities provided; wayfinding improved.
Urban Design                                                     No contribution to recovery. Corbin
                                                                                                               Temporary disruption to wayfinding and        and improving east-west connections to       increased congestion during construction.
 and Visual                                                      Building does not benefit from state                                                                                                                                                       Corbin Building benefits from state          Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan, signage,
                   Some views temporarily obscured by                                                         increased congestion during construction.     and from WTC; Congestion reduced and               Corbin Building underpinned and
 Resources                                                      ownership or increased public access.                                                                                                                                                    ownership and increased public access.          Maintenance and Protection of Traffic
                             construction.                                                                     Corbin Building Isolated. Corbin Building    amenities provided; wayfinding improved.      integrated into the FSTC. Corbin Building
                                                                 FSTC has visible presence/ identity                                                                                                                                                      Views of Corbin Building restored and                 Plan (see Chapter 6).
                                                                                                                      may be visually obscured.               Corbin Building does not benefit from        may be visually obscured during façade
                                                                 improving the area’s urban design.                                                                                                                                                     Corbin Building façade improved. Corbin
                                                                                                                                                               state ownership or increased public                      improvements.
                                                                                                                                                                             access.                                                                     Building adaptive reuse in conformance,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         as practicable, with US Secretary of the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Historic Buildings
                              Construction                                    Operation                                     Construction                                    Operation                                   Construction                                    Operation
                                                                                                                                                                                                              Various permanent and temporary
                                                                                                                   Various permanent and temporary                                                                                                                                                     Property acquisition under the framework
                                                                                                                                                            Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery       easements would be required and will be       Contributes to Lower Manhattan recovery
                                                                                                              easements would be required and will be                                                                                                                                                     of the Federal Uniform Relocation
                                                                                                                                                              by strengthening Fulton Street corridor     confirmed as engineering advances. Five        by strengthening Fulton Street corridor
                                                                                                              confirmed as engineering advances. Five                                                                                                                                                  Assistance and Real Property Acquisition
                                                                                                                                                               and improving east-west connections           (5) buildings would be acquired and          and improving east-west connections
                                                                                                                 (5) buildings would be acquired and                                                                                                                                                     Policies Act and the New York State
 Displacement                                                                                                                                                to/from WTC; Congestion reduced and              removed. Permanent Relocations:            to/from WTC; Congestion reduced and
                                                                                                                  removed. Permanent Relocations:                                                                                                                                                          Eminent Domain Procedure Law.
and Relocation   No easements or properties acquired. No                                                                                                    amenities provided; No further real estate    Occupants of 189, 194-196, 198, 200-202,         amenities provided. Corbin Building
                                                                     No contribution to recovery.             Occupants of 189, 194-196, 198, 200-202,                                                                                                                                                 Compensation and relocation assistance
                     owners or occupants displaced.                                                                                                                          actions.                      and 204-210 Broadway. Access may be              benefits from state ownership and
                                                                                                               and 204-210 Broadway. Access may be                                                                                                                                                       would be provided for all occupants
                                                                                                                                                                                                           restricted on temporary basis, but would        increased public access. The Entry
                                                                                                               restricted on temporary basis, but would         The Entry Facility would house new                                                                                                                     displaced.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        be maintained.                     Facility would have new occupants.
                                                                                                               be maintained. Temporary displacement        occupants. Temporary access restrictions       Corbin Building acquired and adaptively      Permanent relocation of Corbin Building        The MTA NYCT would work to reduce the
                                                                                                                of tenants in Corbin Building basement                       ended.                        reused. Permanent relocation of Corbin                       occupants.                           duration of access limitations.
                                                                                                                            may be required.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Building occupants.
                                                                                                                                     Table ES-3
                                                                                                             Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action


Resource Area                                   No Action Alternative                                                                           Alternative 9                                                               Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative                                 Planned Action Common to Build
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Alternatives
                               Construction                                 Operation                                   Construction                                      Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Historic buildings protected subject to
                                                                                                          Corbin Building structurally isolated, likely                                                     Corbin Building integrated with FSTC                                                              Environmental Performance
                                                                                                              underpinned, and protected. 195                                                               Entry Facility and underpinned. 195                                                        Commitments (EPCs), CEPP, and Section
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Corbin Building acquired by MTA and                106 Requirements, including
                                                                                                          Broadway underpinned. No alterations to                                                        Broadway underpinned. No alterations to
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         integrated with FSTC Entry Facility, and              Programmatic Agreement.
  Cultural                                                                                                    195 Broadway's historic features                                                                195 Broadway's historic features
                                                                 Corbin Building remains in private                                                           Corbin Building remains in private                                                          subject to benefits associated with long
 Resources                                                                                                  proposed. 45 Station rehabilitated.                                                            proposed. 45 Station rehabilitated.                                                           45 station rehabilitation conforms to
                                No Impacts.                    ownership without benefits associated                                                        ownership without benefits associated                                                       term public ownership. Public access to
                                                                                                             Potential vibration or soil settlement                                                        Potential vibration and soil settlement                                                      U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI)
                                                                 with long term public ownership.                                                             with long term public ownership.                                                            parts of Corbin Building. Direct access
                                                                                                            impacts on Corbin Building, Dennison                                                           impacts on Corbin Building, Dennison                                                        Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        from FSTC to John Street - Maiden Lane
                                                                                                               Building, St. Paul’s Chapel and                                                                 Building, St. Paul’s Chapel and                                                               Buildings, as practicable. Both
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Historic District.
                                                                                                          Graveyard, East River Savings Bank and                                                         Graveyard, East River Savings Bank and                                                         Alternatives 9 and 10 conform to USDOI
                                                                                                                       Bennett Building.                                                                              Bennett Building.                                                                Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Buildings.
                               Construction                                 Operation                                   Construction                                      Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                          NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NOx, SO2,             Beneficial effect on traffic-related mobile   NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NOx, SO2,            Beneficial effect on traffic-related mobile
                  NAAQS not exceeded for CO, NO2, SO2,                                                             and annual avg. PM10;                         source pollutant emissions                       and annual avg. PM10;                        source pollutant emissions               Reduction of PM10, PM2.5 concentrations
 Air Quality                                                  No effect due to pollutant emissions from
                               and PM10                                                                         Exceeded for 24-hour PM10.                   No effect due to stationary source                Exceeded for 24-hour PM10.                  No effect due to stationary source            through ULSD, retrofits, best available
                                                                    mobile or stationary sources.
                      No 24-hour PM2.5 increment.                                                         24-hour PM2.5 increases above NYSDEC              emissions (from heating/mechanical           24-hour PM2.5 increases above NYSDEC             emissions (from heating/mechanical            retrofit technologies, and electrification.
                                                                                                                       CP-33 value.                                        systems).                                  CP-33 value.                                       systems).
                               Construction                                 Operation                                   Construction                                      Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                          Mobile source noise levels in 2006 would                                                        Mobile source noise levels in 2006 would
                                                                                                            decrease or have slight (less than 1.7                                                          decrease or have slight (less than 1.7
                                                                                                          dBA) increases over year 2003 at eight of                                                       dBA) increases over year 2003 at eight of                                                    Construction Environment Protection Plan
                                                                                                             the nine locations. The ninth location                                                          the nine locations. The ninth location                                                      & Program (CEPP) to address work
                  Mobile source noise levels would slightly                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            hours, acoustic barriers, equipment noise
                                                                                                            would experience a 6.8 dBA increase.                                                          would experience a 6.8 dBA increase, of
                   increase up to 2.1 dBA over year 2003                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   muffler/silencers, monitoring, and
                                                                                                           Compared with pre-9/11, mobile source                                                          which 4.6 DBA are directly attributable to
  Noise and          levels at all nine receptor locations.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    compliance enforcement.
                                                                                                          noise levels would decrease or remain the                                                      the Proposed Action. Compared with pre-
  Vibration           Mobile source noise levels would
                                                                             No Impact.                   same at four locations. Stationary source                       No Impacts.                       9/11, mobile source noise levels would                      No Impact.                          Noise reduction specifications in
                     decrease or remain the same at five
                                                                                                          noise levels would be exceeded at seven                                                             decrease or remain the same at five                                                                construction contract.
                  locations and increase at three locations
                                                                                                            sites. Vibration levels at Sites 6 and 8                                                     locations. Vibration levels at Sites 6 and 8                                                  Adherence to the vibration monitoring plan
                   by up to 1.6 dBA over pre-9/11 levels at
                                                                                                          would exceed FTA threshold for extremely                                                       would exceed FTA threshold for extremely                                                      per the Section 106 PA, to be included in
                           all 9 receptor locations.
                                                                                                          fragile buildings during peak construction                                                      fragile buildings during peak construction                                                       the CEPP, for potentially affected
                                                                                                          period. Five historical buildings also would                                                        period. Five historical buildings also                                                                    buildings.
                                                                                                            exceed the NYC Buildings Department                                                                would exceed the NYC Buildings
                                                                                                                       vibration threshold.                                                                     Department vibration threshold.
                               Construction                                 Operation                                   Construction                                      Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
Infrastructure,                                                                                             Existing utilities relocated in utility                                                         Existing utilities relocated in utility
                                                                                                                                                          No adverse impacts. Operational benefits                                                      No adverse impacts. Operational benefits
 Energy, and                                                                                                corridors. DfE/Construction for the                                                             corridors. DfE/Construction for the
                                                              No operational benefits or improvements                                                       associated with public transit project.                                                       associated with public transit project.       CEPP to coordinate utility relocation and
 Solid Waste                    No Impacts.                                                                Environment (CfE) principles used in                                                            Environment (CfE) principles used in
                                                                             to utilities.                                                                New utility connections to Entry Facility on                                                  New utility connections to Entry Facility on             minimize disruption.
                                                                                                          FSTC design and construction to reduce                                                          FSTC design and construction to reduce
                                                                                                                                                                Fulton Street and Broadway.                                                                   Fulton Street and Broadway.
                                                                                                          energy use and solid waste generation.                                                          energy use and solid waste generation.
                               Construction                                 Operation                                   Construction                                      Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Construction practices will minimize
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           suspended solids in construction site
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       drainage and groundwater drawdown. Any
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         groundwater drawdown or groundwater
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          issues will be managed in accordance
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       with the provisions of the CEPP, including
  Natural                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              shoring or sheeting methods that limit the
 Resources                                                                                                  No impacts on geology, groundwater,                                                            No impacts on geology, groundwater,
                                No Impacts.                   No operational benefits or improvements.                                                               No adverse impacts.                                                                           No adverse impacts.                  influx of groundwater into the excavation,
                                                                                                             terrestrial habitat or aquatic habitat.                                                        terrestrial habitat or aquatic habitat.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       and building stabilization measures in the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         event of settlement. Prior to discharging
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            groundwater to the sewer system, a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             NYCDEP permit will be obtained.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Groundwater samples will be collected
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       and groundwater will be treated subject to
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     laboratory results.
                                                                                                                                         Table ES-3
                                                                                                                 Summary Comparison of Impacts by Alternative and Planned Action

Resource Area                                    No Action Alternative                                                                             Alternative 9                                                              Alternative 10 – The Preferred Alternative                                 Planned Action Common to Build
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Alternatives
                              Construction                                     Operation                                    Construction                                    Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Health and Safety Plans, Soil, Soil and
Contaminated                                                                                                   Specific locations where contaminated                                                        Specific locations where contaminated                                                            Gas, and Contaminated Material
Materials and        No action to address existing                                                              materials or soil may be present were          Any lead paint, asbestos, or other            materials or soil may be present were           Any lead paint, asbestos, or other              Management Plan, Groundwater
   Waste                                                            Any lead paint, asbestos, or other
                contaminants except during maintenance                                                          determined through detailed survey of        contaminants would be removed during            determined through detailed survey of         contaminants would be removed during              Management Plan could provide
                                                                      contaminants would remain.
Management                of NYCT facilities.                                                                 sites to be excavated and buildings to be                 deconstruction.                    sites to be excavated and buildings to be                  deconstruction.                        procedures to detect/address all
                                                                                                                            deconstructed.                                                                               deconstructed.                                                                  contaminants in compliance with Federal,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 State and City protocols.




                              Construction                                     Operation                                    Construction                                    Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                              Construction of westernmost edge of Dey                                                      Construction of westernmost edge of Dey
                                                                                                                  Street Passageway and RW – E                                                                 Street Passageway and RW - E                                                               Water pre-treatment activities prior to
                                                                                                              Connector would have relevance to New                                                        Connector would have relevance to New                                                            discharge into the sewer system.
Coastal Zone                                                                                                  York City Coastal Zone Policy Number 5:          Improved public transit access will         York City Coastal Zone Policy Number 5:           Improved public transit access will            Contaminated materials managed,
Consistency                    No Impacts.                        No improved access to the waterfront.       Protect and Improve Water Quality in the       improve waterfront access to East River       Protect and Improve Water Quality in the        improve waterfront access to East River          remediated and/or disposed of in
                                                                                                              New York City Coastal Area and Number                   and Hudson River.                    New York City Coastal Area and Number                    and Hudson River.                    accordance with all laws and regulations
                                                                                                               7: Minimize Environmental Degradation                                                        7: Minimize Environmental Degradation                                                          and prevented from entering coastal
                                                                                                                  from Solid Waste and Hazardous                                                               from Solid Waste and Hazardous                                                                           systems.
                                                                                                                            Substances.                                                                                  Substances.
                                                                                                                                                                 Transit patron safety maintained/                                                             Transit patron safety maintained/
                                                                                                                                                             improved through design to prescriptive                                                       improved through design to prescriptive
                                                                                                              Worker safety protected through contract      codes and scenario-based evaluations of        Worker safety protected through contract       codes and scenario-based evaluations of
 Safety and                                                     Safety and security remains responsive to       Health and Safety Plans. Temporary                       fire and incidents.                 Health and Safety Plans. Temporary                        fire and incidents.               Implementation of Health and Safety Plan
                     Existing conditions maintained.
  Security                                                         MTA NYCT practices/requirements.           signage and traffic controls for vehicular       Security improved through design of         signage and traffic controls for vehicular        Security improved through design of              for each construction contract.
                                                                                                                       and pedestrian safety.                 defensible space, improved sightlines,                and pedestrian safety.                  defensible space, improved sightlines,
                                                                                                                                                              lighting, and space activation by retail                                                      lighting, and space activation by retail
                                                                                                                                                                              operation.                                                                                    operation.
                              Construction                                     Operation                                    Construction                                    Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                                No disproportionately high or adverse                                                        No disproportionately high or adverse                                                       None required. All property acquisition to
Environmental                                                                                                                                                 No disproportionately high or adverse                                                         No disproportionately high or adverse
                                                                                                                  impacts on low income or minority                                                            impacts on low income or minority                                                            be undertaken within framework of
   Justice                                                                                                                                                      impacts on low income or minority                                                             impacts on low income or minority
                               No Impacts.                               No operational impacts.                communities. No indirect business or                                                         communities. No indirect business or                                                         Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance
                                                                                                                                                              communities. Access to businesses in                                                          communities. Access to businesses in
                                                                                                              residential displacements in communities                                                     residential displacements in communities                                                      and Real Properties Acquisition Policies
                                                                                                                                                                Lower Manhattan to be improved.                                                               Lower Manhattan to be improved.
                                                                                                                              of concern.                                                                                  of concern.                                                                                      Act.
                              Construction                                     Operation                                    Construction                                    Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                   Potential cumulative effects of major              FSTC would not contribute to the        May cause temporary cumulative adverse                                                       May cause temporary cumulative adverse
                   Lower Manhattan Recovery Projects                 revitalization of Lower Manhattan.       effects on access and circulation, traffic,                                                  effects on access and circulation, traffic,
                                                                                                                                                                 Operational benefits from 2007                                                                Operational benefits from 2007
                without the FSTC would occur. The FSTC          Increased transit improvements and other       air quality and noise, cultural resources                                                    air quality and noise, cultural resources
 Cumulative                                                                                                                                                 onward. Benefits include improved transit                                                     onward. Benefits include improved transit
                 would not contribute to such impacts, or       benefits for Lower Manhattan through the       and business/economic interests. Such                                                        and business/economic interests. Such                                                        EPCs implemented in coordination and
  Impacts                                                                                                                                                   access to Lower Manhattan over decades                                                        access to Lower Manhattan over decades
                 interaction of cumulative impacts among          contribution of FSTC to the benefits of       effects would be temporary, and offset                                                       effects would be temporary, and offset                                                      cooperation with other Recovery Project
                                                                                                                                                                and substantial contribution to the                                                           and substantial contribution to the
                other projects. Beneficial effects on (local)      other projects would not occur. Other       by long-term cumulative benefits of the                                                      by long-term cumulative benefits of the                                                                     Sponsors.
                                                                                                                                                              revitalization of Lower Manhattan and                                                         revitalization of Lower Manhattan and
                  business and economic interests due to            Lower Manhattan projects would be             FSTC. Beneficial effects on (local)                                                          FSTC. Beneficial effects on (local)
                                                                                                                                                                   sustained economic growth.                                                                    sustained economic growth.
                construction spending by other Recovery         operational, aiding economic revitalization    business and economic interests due to                                                       business and economic interests due to
                                projects only                    and improved transit access and service.                construction spending.                                                                       construction spending.
                              Construction                                     Operation                                    Construction                                    Operation                                    Construction                                     Operation
                                                                                                                                                                                                            No temporary use of 4(f) properties. No
                                                                                                                                                                                                            constructive use of 4(f) resources would
                                                                                                                                                                                                                occur; proximity impacts would be
                                                                                                                No temporary use of 4(f) properties. No                                                      minimized or avoided so no substantial                                                      As applicable and practicable, work would
                                                                                                               constructive use of Section 4(f) resources                                                  impairment of the 4(f) resources. Views of                                                     conform to the Secretary of the Interior’s
                                                                                                                would occur; proximity impacts would be                                                             4(f) resources would not be                                                            Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic
                                                                                                                minimized or avoided so no substantial       Four (4) Section 4(f) resources would be          obstructed/eliminated; the aesthetic                                                       Properties and other relevant guidelines
                                                                                                                 impairment of 4(f) resources. Views of         permanently used (i.e., permanently         quality of the 4(f) resources would not be     Four (4) Section 4(f) resources would be       and management procedures, including
                                                                                                                       4(f) resources would not be          incorporated) by this Alternative. Potential     substantially impaired. Underpinning of          permanently used (i.e., permanently          U.S.C. Section 303 and implementing
 Section 4(f)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             incorporated) by this Alternative. Potential
                                                                                                                   obstructed/eliminated; the aesthetic      historic archaeological resources present     the Corbin Building would be considered a                                                        regulations codified in 23 CFR Part
 Evaluation                    No Impacts.                                     No Impacts.                                                                                                                                                                 historic archaeological resources present
                                                                                                               quality of the 4(f) resources would not be    in the vicinity of Dey Street. None of the           permanent use of a Section 4(f)                                                                         771.135.
                                                                                                                substantially impaired. Underpinning of       avoidance alternatives are prudent and        Resource. Access to views of the Corbin        in the vicinity of Dey Street. None of the
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            avoidance alternatives are prudent and         Procedures to identify, evaluate and, if
                                                                                                              the Corbin Building would be considered a                         feasible.                     Building would be restricted during the                                                      necessary, mitigate any disturbance of
                                                                                                                     permanent use of a Section 4(f)                                                          construction period, however this is a                          feasible.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          archaeological resources present in the
                                                                                                                                Resource.                                                                       temporary restriction that does not                                                      archaeological APE during construction in
                                                                                                              Potential historic archaeological resources                                                    diminish the utility of this resource, and                                                      accordance with the Programmatic
                                                                                                                       present in the project area.                                                            access would be restored following                                                                       Agreement.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            construction.
                                                                                                                                                                                                           Potential historic archaeological resources
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    present in the project area.
This Page Intentionally Left Blank