You are using an UNSUPPORTED version of browser, please try to update your browser.

City Record 311 Search all NYC.gov websites
Advanced

Notice Details

Title: Rockefeller University Expansion
Special Materials
City Planning (DCP)
City Planning Commission
Archived
8/28/2013
Notice
Description

POSITIVE DECLARATION

                                   

Project Identification                                                                        Lead Agency

Rockefeller University Expansion                                                      City Planning Commission

CEQR No. 14DCP019M                                                                    22 Reade Street

ULURP Nos. Pending                                                                                    New York, NY 10007

SEQRA Classification: Type I                                                           Contact: Robert Dobruskin                                                                                                                 (212) 720-3423                                                                                                                                              

Name, Description and Location of Proposal:

Rockefeller University Expansion

The applicant, Rockefeller University, is proposing a modification to an existing Large Scale Community Facility Development (LSCFD), an amendment to the city map, a special permit,  and other approvals, collectively referred to as the “proposed actions,” affecting all or portions of a superblock located in the Upper East Side neighborhood of Manhattan, Community District 8. The affected area coincides with the boundaries of the existing LSCFD (which extends from East 62nd Street to the centerline of demapped East 68th Street between York Avenue and the bulkhead east of the FDR Drive) and includes the Rockefeller University campus in its entirety (Block 1480, Lots 10 and 9010; Block 1475, Lots 5 and 9005). The proposed discretionary actions, which are subject to environmental review, include:

 

  1. A special permit pursuant to Section 74-682 ZR for construction in air space over the FDR Drive and rear yard waivers.
  2. An amendment to the City Map pursuant to the New York City Charter to eliminate, discontinue, and close portions of the FDR Drive right-of-way and the disposition of real property related thereto, to allow for the placement of columns and footings in the East River Esplanade and on the west side of the FDR Drive associated with the construction of the proposed laboratory building.
  3. Modification of Rockefeller University’s previously-approved LSCFD (C821257 ZAM).
  4. Approval of building and column locations in and over the FDR Drive and East River Esplanade pursuant to Article 12A of an existing agreement between Rockefeller University, New York Hospital and Hospital for Special Surgery with the City of New York (the “1973 Agreement”), as amended in 1993 by Article 13 of the Third Amendment to the 1973 Agreement.
  5. Approval by the Director of City Planning pursuant to Article 12B of the 1973 Agreement of landscaping, security, and lighting plans in accordance with Article 11, a ventilation plan and a noise quality plan, plans for closing the FDR Drive and East River Esplanade in accordance with Article 7.
  6. Determination of consistency with Waterfront Revitalization Program CPC, acting as City Coastal Commission.

The proposal would also require discretionary actions from state and national agencies. An Authorization under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (33 USC 1225(a)(2)(C)), as well as a Notice to Mariners, would be required from the U.S. Coast Guard (UCG); an Approval under Nationwide Permit 33 would be required from the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a NY-2C Discharge Permit related to dewatering during construction, would be required from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC).  

 

The proposed actions would facilitate a proposal by the applicant to develop three new buildings containing institutional and support uses on two development sites within the Rockefeller University LSCFD.  The proposed buildings, which total approximately 165,000 gross square feet (gsf) include: (1) a two-story, approximately 154,314-gsf laboratory building complex, including two one-story pavilions (housing dining hall and support spaces); (2) a one-story approximately 3,235-gsf conference and meeting pavilion; and (3) a new 20,498-gsf one-story fitness center. The laboratory building complex and conference and meeting pavilion would be constructed on a platform structure occupying air space that spans a portion of the FDR Drive (between demapped East 68th Street and East 64th Street). Approximately 450 sf of the western portion of the East River Esplanade (immediately adjacent to the affected portion of the FDR Drive) would be demapped to create room for 10 structural columns and footings supporting the platform structure. The proposed new fitness center would be constructed on the northwest corner of the Rockefeller University campus, at the corner of York Avenue and the demapped East 68th Street. The development of these new structures in the Rockefeller University campus would raise the total floor area of the existing LSCFD from approximately 2,039,214 gsf to 2,204,157 gsf.

 

The affected area is currently developed with the Rockefeller University campus, which comprises approximately 1,415,960 gsf of institutional and support uses. The development facilitated by the proposed actions would not be expected to increase the number of residents, users or workers within the Rockefeller University campus, but would rather provide new institutional and support facilities for existing students, faculty staff and other workers. 

 

The Rockefeller University LSCFD was designated in 1983 in accordance with provisions incorporated in the New York City Zoning Resolution. The LSCFD designation makes the campus a “superblock,” allowing the University flexibility in utilizing its development rights, provided that the aggregate of all development does not exceed a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 10. The underlying zoning designations on the LSCFD are R9 and R10. The maximum permitted zoning floor area in the LSCFD is 6,051,090 zoning square feet (zsf). The proposed project would require modifications to the LSCFD to reflect the proposed floor area and lot coverage.  

Since the building program, as proposed, is identified in the LSCFD as part of the land use application for the above-referenced projected, the proposed development is considered to be the reasonable worst-case development scenario for the purpose of analyzing the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project.

Absent the proposed actions, the Rockefeller University campus would remove an existing temporary structure housing university offices and support uses (the “IT Pavilion”) located within University’s campus (at East 66th Street and York Avenue), and replace it with landscaping. Otherwise, the entire affected area would remain as in its existing conditions.

The proposed project is expected to be completed by 2019.

Statement of Significant Effect:

On behalf of the CPC, the Environmental Assessment and Review Division has determined, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.7, that the proposed action may have a significant effect on the quality of the environment as detailed in the following environmental impacts, and that an environmental impact statement will be required:

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to land use, zoning and public policy in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to socioeconomic conditions in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to community facilities and services in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to publicly accessible open space in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to shadows in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to historic and cultural resources in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to urban design and visual resources in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to natural resources in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to hazardous materials in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to water and sewer infrastructure in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to solid waste and sanitation services in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to energy consumption in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to transportation systems, including, traffic, parking, transit or pedestrian conditions in the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to air quality in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions in the affected area.

                                 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to noise in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to public health in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse impacts related to neighborhood character in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

  1. The actions, as proposed, may result in significant adverse construction-related impacts in the vicinity of the affected area.

 

Supporting Statement:

The above determination is based on an Environmental Assessment Statement prepared for the action which finds that:

 

  1. Land Use, Zoning and Public Policy – The proposed actions would alter existing land use patterns in the directly affected area by facilitating the development of an elevated platform and institutional uses above the FDR Drive and East River Esplanade. Additionally, the affected area is located within the City’s coastal zone and therefore may result in actions that could be inconsistent with the City’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. 

 

  1. Socioeconomic Conditions – The proposed actions would not result in any incremental increase in the residential, user or worker population in the affected area.  Further, the proposed actions would not result in direct residential displacement, direct business and institutional displacement, indirect residential displacement, indirect business and institutional displacement or adverse effects on a specific industry. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts related to socioeconomic conditions are anticipated as a result of the proposed actions.

 

  1. Community Facilities and Services – The proposed actions would not result in any incremental increase in the residential, user or worker population in the affected area.  Further, the proposed actions would not affect, either directly or indirectly, public or publicly funded schools, libraries, child care centers, health care facilities or fire or police protection. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts related to community facilities and services are anticipated as a result of the proposed actions.

 

  1. Open Space – Since the proposed actions would result in the placement of structural columns and related footings along approximately 350 square feet of the East River Esplanade, the proposal may result in a direct effect on an existing publicly accessible open space resource.

 

 

  1. Shadows – The proposed actions would result in new structures greater than 50 feet in height and adjacent to an existing sunlight-sensitive resource, the East River Esplanade. Therefore, shadows cast by the proposed new development resulting from the proposed actions could affect sunlight-sensitive, resources.

 

  1. Historic and Cultural Resources – The proposed actions would result in in-ground disturbance within the affected area, which may contain archeological remains.  In a comment letter dated October 11, 2012, the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) determined that the proposed project could have the potential for impacts related to archeological resources.

 

Additionally, the proposed actions would result in new construction within the Rockefeller University campus, a portion of which was determined eligible as a historic district, for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places (S/NR eligible) and for designation as a New York City Landmark (NYCL).  Portions of the proposed project’s development sites are located within the boundaries of the S/NR-eligible and NYCL-eligible historic district. In addition, one of the development sites is located adjacent to the “Founder’s Hall” campus building, a National Historic Landmark (NHL).

 

  1. Urban Design and Visual Resources – The proposed actions would result in physical changes beyond those allowed by existing zoning and which could be observed by a pedestrian from street level.  Additionally, the proposed action would have the potential to change the urban design and visual character of the affected area. 

 

  1. Natural Resources – The proposed actions would result in development in an area that is predominantly developed, and would not result in effects to aquatic resources, wetlands, groundwater or terrestrial resources.  As such, it is not anticipated that significant adverse impacts on natural resources would result from the proposed actions.

 

  1. Hazardous Materials – The proposed actions could result in new construction and in-ground disturbance within the affected area, which has a documented history of hazardous materials conditions.

 

  1. Water and Sewer Infrastructure – The proposed actions would not result in any new incremental residential, user or worker populations, or result in new development that would have exceptionally large demand for water, is located at the extremities of the water distribution systems, is located in a combined sewer, separately sewered or currently unsewered area, or would involve construction of new stormwater outfalls. Therefore, significant adverse impacts related to Water and Sewer Infrastructure are not expected to result from the proposed actions.

 

  1. Solid Waste and Sanitation Services – The proposed actions do not have the potential to generate a substantial increase in solid waste production that may overburden available management capacity or otherwise be inconsistent with the city’s Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP) or with policy related to the City’s integrated solid waste management system.   Therefore, the proposed actions are not anticipated to result in any significant adverse impacts related to solid waste and sanitation services.

 

  1. Energy – The proposed actions would not significantly affect the transmission or generation of energy or generate substantial indirect consumption of energy. Based on a preliminary analysis, the proposed actions would result in the annual energy consumption of approximately 45,000 million BTUs, a negligible incremental increase compared with the approximately 327 trillion BTUs of energy consumed annually within its service area. Therefore, the proposed actions are not expected to result in any significant adverse impacts related to energy.

 

  1. Transportation – The proposed actions would not result in any increase in the residential, user or worker population in the affected area. No incremental increase in vehicular, transit or pedestrian trips is expected to result from the proposed actions. The total number of parking spaces in the affected area would remain unchanged. Therefore, the proposed actions are not expected to result in significant adverse impacts related to transportation. 

 

  1. Air Quality – The proposed actions would result in the construction of a platform over the FDR Drive, which could limit the dispersion of pollutant concentrations on the East River Esplanade.  Additionally, the proposed actions would result in development of new laboratory facilities with fume hoods.

 

  1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions – The proposed actions would not result in development of 350,000 square feet or greater. Therefore significant adverse impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions are not expected to result from the proposed actions.

 

  1. Noise – The proposed action would allow construction of a platform over the FDR Drive, which would be expected to increase noise levels on the East River Esplanade and could have the potential to result in significant adverse stationary noise impacts.  

 

  1. Public Health – The proposed action could result in effects related to air quality, hazardous materials and noise, and consequently public health may be affected.

 

  1. Neighborhood Character – The proposed action could affect urban design and visual resources, historic and cultural resources and noise; consequently, the affected area’s neighborhood character may be affected.

 

  1. Construction – Potential significant adverse impacts related to architectural resources and transportation, air quality, noise, and natural resources during construction could result in significant adverse construction impacts.

 

  1. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to be prepared for the proposed action will identify and describe any other potential effects on the environment.

 

 

Public Scoping:

The CEQR lead agency hereby requests that the applicant prepare or have prepared, at their option, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in accordance with 6 NYCRR 617.9(b) and Sections 6-08 and 6-12 of Executive Order No. 91 of 1977 as amended (City Environmental Quality Review).

 

A public scoping meeting will be held on Thursday, September 26, 2013 at 10:00 AM at the New York City Department of City Planning, Spector Hall, 22 Reade Street, New York, New York, 10007.    Written comments will be accepted by the lead agency through Monday, October 7, 2013.

 

This determination has been prepared in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law.

 

Should you have any questions pertaining to this Positive Declaration, you may contact the Project Manager, Olga Abinader, at (212) 720-3493.

NYC Open Data Portal Contact Us

Disclaimer: Pursuant to Section 103 (2) of the New York State General Municipal Law, New York City Charter Section 1066 and the City of New York Procurement Policy Board Rules, The City Record is the official paper of the City of New York. It is published each weekday except legal holidays. The print edition of The City Record is the official publication for the following notices: public hearings, meetings, court notices, property dispositions, procurements (solicitations and awards), agency public hearings, agency rules, and special materials which include changes in personnel. This electronic version of The City Record is offered solely for the convenience of readers.