VISUAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT...Figure 2-14: View Looking West at Old Calvary Cemetery and Distant View...

VISUAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT AND SELECTION OF KEY VIEWPOINTS

February 2007

New York State Department of Transportation

Kosciuszko Bridge Project

Visual Resource Assessment Table of Contents

Kosciuszko Bridge Project i February 2007

Chapter I INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................I-1

Chapter II EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT.................................................................................II-1

A. Project Area....................................................................................................................................II-1B. Visual Character of the Project Area..............................................................................................II-3C. Visual Quality of Project Area ........................................................................................................II-4D. Viewer Groups and Viewer Exposure ............................................................................................II-4E. Visual Environment of Visual Districts ...........................................................................................II-6

E.1. The Bridge Visual District.......................................................................................................II-6E.2. Old Calvary Cemetery Visual District .....................................................................................II-9E.3 The Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District .............................................................II-10E.4. The Newtown Creek Waterway Visual District.....................................................................II-13E.5. Residential and Commercial District of the Greenpoint and East Williamsburg Communities in Brooklyn ...........................................................................................................................................II-14

F. Views of the Kosciuszko Bridge from Areas Beyond the Specific Visual Districts ......................II-16G. Selection of Key Viewpoints.........................................................................................................II-19

Viewpoint 1 – View from the Westbound Queens Approach looking toward the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Bridge Visual District) ...................................................................................................II-22Viewpoint 2 – View from the westbound Queens Approach looking toward the Manhattan skyline (Bridge Visual District)......................................................................................................................II-23Viewpoint 3 – View from the Eastbound Brooklyn Approach toward the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Bridge Visual District) ............................................................................................................II-24Viewpoint 4 – View from the eastbound Brooklyn Approach looking southwest (Bridge Visual District).........................................................................................................................................................II-25Viewpoint 5 – View from Old Calvary Cemetery (Queens) Looking Southeast at the Queens Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Old Calvary Cemetery District)...............................II-26Viewpoint 6 – View from Laurel Hill Boulevard (Queens) Looking South towards the Queens Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Old Calvary Cemetery Visual District)....................II-27Viewpoint 7 – View from 56th Road and 43rd Street (Queens) of the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Residential and Commercial District)..............................................................................................II-28Viewpoint 8 – View from the Newtown Creek Waterway Looking Northwest at the Brooklyn Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Newtown Creek Waterway District) ........................................II-29Viewpoint 9 – View from the Intersection of Anthony Street and Vandervoort Avenue in (East Williamsburg) Looking North at the Brooklyn Connector (Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District) .............................................................................................................................................II-30Viewpoint 10 – View from the Westbound Exit Ramp Looking Southwest Along Meeker Avenue toward Apollo Street (Residential and Commercial District) ............................................................II-31Viewpoint 11 – View from the Intersection of Meeker Avenue and Morgan Avenue looking Northeast along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District) .............................................II-32Viewpoint 12 – View from the Intersection of Hausman Street and Meeker Avenue Looking East along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District) .............................................II-33

Chapter III PROJECT ELEMENTS.....................................................................................................III-1

A. Introduction....................................................................................................................................III-1c. Build Alternatives Design Features...............................................................................................III-2

C.1. Design Featires Common to All Build Alternatives ...............................................................III-2C.2. Design Features Specific to Build Alternatives .....................................................................III-7

D. Streetscape & Landscape Enhancements..................................................................................III-10E. Parks and Facilities and Parklands.............................................................................................III-12

Chapter IV VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... IV-1

A. Introduction................................................................................................................................... IV-1B. Impacts to Viewer Groups............................................................................................................ IV-1C. Visual Impacts at Key Viewpoints ................................................................................................ IV-3


Kosciuszko Bridge Project ii February 2007

Chapter V Mitigation ......................................................................................................................... V-1

A. Introduction.................................................................................................................................... V-1B. Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... V-1

Appendix A GLOSSARY OF TERMS .............................................................................................. A-1

Figures

Figure 1-1: Aerial Photograph of Project Area...........................................................................................I-2 Figure 1-2: Bridge Plan and Elevations .....................................................................................................I-3 Figure 2-1: Visual Districts ........................................................................................................................II-2 Figure 2-2: Aerial View of the Brooklyn Approach and Westbound Exit Ramp .........................................II-3 Figure 2-3: Aerial View of the Main Span Above Newtown Creek Looking East.......................................II-3 Figure 2-4: Aerial View of the Brooklyn Approach Looking Southwest .....................................................II-3 Figure 2-5: Aerial View of the Brooklyn Connector (Concrete Viaduct and Closure Wall) at Varick Avenue

...........................................................................................................................................................II-3 Figure 2-6: Aerial View of Queens Approach Looking east .......................................................................II-4Figure 2-7: Aerial View of Queens Approach Looking northEast ..............................................................II-4 Figure 2-8: View Traveling Westbound on the BQE Approaching the Kosciuszko Bridge........................II-7 Figure 2-9: View of the Kosciusko Bridge Main Span Through Truss .......................................................II-7 Figure 2-10: View Traveling Westbound on the BQE Approaching the Morgan Avenue Exit ...................II-7 Figure 2-11: View Traveling Westbound on the BQE AT the Morgan Avenue Exit...................................II-7 FigUre 2-12: View Traveling Eastbound on the BQE Approaching the LIE/48th Street Exit .....................II-8 Figure 2-13: View of Old Calvary Cemetery, Newtown Creek Industrial District and the Manhattan Skyline

...........................................................................................................................................................II-8 Figure 2-14: View Looking West at Old Calvary Cemetery and Distant View of the Manhattan Skyline ..II-8 Figure 2-15: Views from Old Calvary Cemetery Looking Southeast at the Queens and Brooklyn

Approaches and the Main Span of the Bridge .................................................................................II-10Figure 2-16: View of the bridge Main Span Near the Entrance to Old Calvary Cemetery ......................II-10 Figure 2-17: View from Newtown Creek Industrial District in Brooklyn at the Intersection of Meeker

Avenue and Bridgewater Street Looking Northeast at the bridge....................................................II-11 Figure 2-18: View from Newtown Creek Industrial District in Queens East of Newtown Creek Looking

Northwest at the Bridge....................................................................................................................II-11 Figure 2-19: View of the Queens Approach from Laurel Hill Boulevard & 56th Road.............................II-12 Figure 2-20: View of Queens Approach and Main Span Looking Southwest from Laurel Hill Boulevard &

54th Road.........................................................................................................................................II-12 Figure 2-21: View of the Brooklyn Connector Closure Walls at Cherry Street and Varick Avenue.........II-13 Figure 2-22: View Looking Northeast at the Brooklyn Approach Deck Truss from Cherry Street...........II-13 Figure 2-23: Views of the Approaches and Bridge from Newtown Creek ...............................................II-14 Figure 2-24: Residences on Meeker Avenue Adjacent to the Brooklyn Connector.................................II-15 Figure 2-25: View of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground and the Brooklyn Connector..................II-15 Figure 2-26: View of Brooklyn Connector and Residences on Meeker Avenue from the westbound exit

ramp Looking Southwest..................................................................................................................II-15 Figure 2-27: View of the Brooklyn Connector at the Intersection of Cherry Street and Morgan Avenue

Looking Northeast ............................................................................................................................II-15 Figure 2-28: View of Brooklyn Connector Adjacent to Residences Looking East on Meeker Avenue from

Hausman Street ...............................................................................................................................II-16 Figure 2-29: View at the Intersection of Morgan Avenue and Meeker Avenue Looking South ...............II-16 Figure 2-30: Distant Views of the Bridge Looking South from 39th Street in Sunnyside, Queens..........II-17 Figure 2-31: View Looking Southwest at the Bridge While Traveling Westbound on the LIE .................II-17 Figure 2-32: View Looking East at the Bridge While Traveling Eastbound on the J.J. Byrne Memorial

Bridge (Greenpoint Avenue) ............................................................................................................II-17 Figure 2-33: Distant View of the Bridge While Traveling on the Pulaski Bridge and Looking East .........II-18 Figure 2-34: Distant View Looking West at the Bridge from Grover Cleveland Park in Ridgewood, Queens

.........................................................................................................................................................II-19


Kosciuszko Bridge Project iii February 2007

Figure 2-35: Distant View Looking West at the Bridge from Mount Olivet Cemetery in Maspeth, Queens.. .........................................................................................................................................................II-19

Figure 2-36: Viewpoints ...........................................................................................................................II-21 Figure 2-37: Viewpoint 1 ..........................................................................................................................II-22 Figure 2-38: Viewpoint 2 ..........................................................................................................................II-23 Figure 2-39: Viewpoint 3 ..........................................................................................................................II-24 Figure 2-40: Viewpoint 4 ..........................................................................................................................II-25 Figure 2-41: Viewpoint 5 ..........................................................................................................................II-26 Figure 2-42: Viewpoint 6 ..........................................................................................................................II-27 Figure 2-43: Viewpoint 7. .........................................................................................................................II-28 Figure 2-44: Viewpoint 8 ..........................................................................................................................II-29 Figure 2-45: Viewpoint 9 ..........................................................................................................................II-30 Figure 2-46: Viewpoint 10 ........................................................................................................................II-31 Figure 2-47: Viewpoint 11 ........................................................................................................................II-32 Figure 2-48: Viewpoint 12 ........................................................................................................................II-33 Figure 3-1: Representative Architectural Treatment for Closure Walls ....................................................III-3 Figure 3-2: Representative Architectural Treatment for Closure Walls ....................................................III-4 Figure 3-3: Representative Architectural Treatment for Closure Walls ....................................................III-5 Figure 3-4: Conceptual Open Space Opportunities...............................................................................III-11Figure 4-1: Viewpoint 1 from Existing Bridge (New Parallel Bridge with Bikeway/Walkway on Right Side -

Not Shown) ...................................................................................................................................... IV-4 Figure 4-2: Viewpoint 1 from New Westbound Bridge (Bikeway/Walkway on the Right Side)............... IV-5 Figure 4-3: Viewpoint 2 from Bikeway/Walkway..................................................................................... IV-6 Figure 4-4: Viewpoint 3 from Rehabilitated Existing Bridge (New Parallel Bridge Not Shown).............. IV-7 Figure 4-5: Representative View from Viewpoint 3 with Replacement Alternative................................. IV-8 Figure 4-6: Representative Viewpoint 4 from Existing Bridge ................................................................ IV-9Figure 4-7: Representatives View from Viewpoint 5 with Rehabilitation Alternatives........................... IV-10 Figure 4-8: Representative View from Viewpoint 6 with Rehabilitation Alternative RA-6, BR-2, and BR-3 . .

.................................................................................................................................... IV-10 Figure 4-9: Representative View from Viewpoint 5 of Bridge Replacement Alternative....................... IV-11 Figure 4-10: Representative View from Viewpoint 6 (Laurel Hill Boulevard) for Alternatives RA-5 and BR-

5 .................................................................................................................................... IV-12 Figure 4-11: Representative View from Viewpoint 7 with Rehabilitation Alternative ............................ IV-13 Figure 4-12: Representative View from Viewpoint 7 with Replacement Alternatives ........................... IV-14 Figure 4-13: Representative View from Viewpoint 8 with Rehabilitation Alternative ............................ IV-15 Figure 4-14: Representative View from Viewpoint 8 with Replacement Alternatives .......................... IV-16 Figure 4-15: Representative View from Viewpoint 9 of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground for

Alternatives Except BR-5. .............................................................................................................. IV-17 Figure 4-16: Representative View from Viewpoint 10 of Meeker Avenue Triangle for All Alternatives

Except BR-5. .................................................................................................................................. IV-18 Figure 4-17: Viewpoint 11 for All Alternatives Except BR-5................................................................... IV-18Figure 4-18: Viewpoint 12 for All Alternatives........................................................................................ IV-19 Figure 4-19: Representative View from viewpoint 10 of Meeker Avenue Triangle for Replacement

Alternative BR-5 ............................................................................................................................. IV-20

Tables

Table 4-1: Summary of Alternative Visual Impacts on Groups……………………………. ...................... .IV-3 Table 4-2: Major Design Features………………………………………………………….......................... IV-21 Table 4-3: Summary of Impacts By Viewpoint and Alternative……………………………...................... IV-22

Kosciuszko Bridge Project I-1 February 2007

Chapter I Introduction The Kosciuszko Bridge Project is located within the Boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn in New York City and comprises a 1.1- mile segment of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE, I-278) between Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn and the Long Island Expressway (LIE, I-495) interchange in Queens. As one of New York City’s few interstate highways, the BQE serves commuter and local traffic. Throughout its length, the highway is above Newtown Creek, the Newtown Creek Industrial Area and the Brooklyn residential areas of Greenpoint and East Williamsburg. The travelway on the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches varies in height from 7.6 meters (24.8 feet) to 34.7 meters (114 feet) above grade and consists of a deck truss supported on concrete columns. The Main Span above Newtown Creek is located 38.1 meters (125 feet) above the creek and consists of a through truss supported on steel piers (shown in Figures 1-1 and 1-2). The bridge at its current elevation is significantly above the lower buildings and vacant lands below, the bridge and approaches are noticeable visual elements, and provide visual opportunities for users. Motorists traveling across the bridge view the roadway, Newtown Creek, the Main Span through truss, and the Brooklyn, Queens and Manhattan skylines. Persons within the adjacent environs view various portions of the bridge including the deck and through trusses, columns, ramps, abutments and closure walls of the structure.

The New York State Department of Transportation is currently preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) evaluating alternatives for the rehabilitation/replacement of the Kosciuszko Bridge. Two types of build alternatives are being evaluated in the DEIS. The first type, Rehabilitation with Auxiliary Lanes Alternative, provides an in-kind rehabilitation of the existing structures and construction of a new structure on a parallel alignment. The main span of the new structure above Newtown Creek would be approximately 8.5 meters (28 feet) lower than the main span of the existing bridge. The second type, Bridge Replacement Alternatives, would demolish the existing structure(s) and construct a new bridge on a parallel alignment or within the footprint of the existing bridge. The main span of the new structure(s) above Newtown Creek would be approximately 8.5 meters (28 feet) lower than the main span of the existing bridge.

Both alternative types would result in a widened structure(s) as well as changes in the horizontal alignment, profile, structure type and relationship of the bridge to existing natural and man-made features. Therefore, a Visual Resource Assessment (VRA) was performed to determine the potential visual impacts resulting from the alternatives considered. The VRA follows the methodology adopted from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) office of Environmental Policy “Visual Impact Assessments for Highway Projects, 1981.” The VRA process is outlined below.

Define the project area, important visual resources and visual quality (hereinafter referred to as Visual Environment) of the bridge and adjacent areas and identify the major viewer groups;

Analyze existing visual resources and viewer responses to those resources;

MC GUINNESS BLVD S

56RD

MONITOR ST

KINGSLAND AV

NA

SSA

UA

V

N HENRY ST

MORGAN AV

DR

IGG

SA

V

LOM

BAR

DYST

JEWEL ST

VARICK AV

CHER

RYST

37ST

APOLLO ST

SUTTON ST

GREE

NPOI

NTAV

HAUSMAN ST

MOULTRIE ST

ANT

HO

NYST

STARR AV

34ST

LAURELHILLBL

GRE

ENPO

INT

AV

MEEKERAV

48ST

KO

SCIU

SZK

OB

RID

GE

BEAD

ELST

VANDERVOORT AV

VAN DAM STVAN DAM STVANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

BRID

GEW

ATER

ST

BRADLEY AV

BRADLEY AV

BRADLEY AV

KINGS

LAND

AVE

SCOTT AVSCOTT AVSCOTT AV

REVIEW

AVE

35ST

NEWTOW

NCRE

EK

50ST

55AV54

DR

54A

V

54R

D

53AV

43ST

44ST

46ST 48ST

49ST

PAGEPL49LA

41ST

42ST

44ST

45ST

46ST

47ST

48ST

LIE

Que

ens

App

roac

h(D

eck

Trus

s)

Mai

n Sp

an(D

eck

& T

hrou

gh T

russ

)

Bro

okly

n A

ppro

ach

(Dec

k Tr

uss)

Bro

okly

n C

onne

ctor

(Con

cret

e Vi

aduc

t)Mee

kerAve

.

Viaduc

t

LIE

Inte

rcha

nge

Proj

ect L

imit

Proj

ect L

imit

NYC

DEP

Bas

emap

Cop

yrig

hted

by

City

of N

ew Y

ork

Dep

artm

ent o

f Env

ironm

enta

l Pr

otec

tion,

Sub

-lice

nsed

from

New

Yor

k St

ate

Dep

artm

ent o

f Tra

nspo

rtatio

n - R

egio

n 11

.

Figu

re 1

-1Ae

rial P

hoto

grap

h of

Pro

ject

Are

aNe

w Yo

rk S

tate

Depa

rtmen

t of T

rans

porta

tion

050

01,

000 Fe

et

015

030

0Met

ers

Borough of QueensBorough of Brooklyn

35’MIN.

APPROX.EXISTINGGROUND

29’ MIN.(UNDER WEST TRUSS)

51’ MIN.(UNDER WEST TRUSS)

21’ MIN.(AT CL B.Q.E.)

14’-2” MIN.(AT EAST FASCIA)

15’-4” MIN.(AT EAST FASCIA)

14’ +/- MIN.

250’

M.H.W. EL. 0.00

124.5M

IN.

74ÕMIN

.

SCOTT AVE. 56th RD. 55th AVE. 54th RD.GARDINER AVE.STEWART AVE.VARICK AVE.PORTER AVE.VANDERVOORT AVE.

NEWTO

WN

CR

EE

K

56TH R

D.

54TH R

D.

55THAVE.

54THAVE.

54TH R

D.

LAUREL HILL

MEEKER AVE.

VAN

DAM

ST.

APO

LLO

ST.

HAU

SMAN

ST.

DRIGGS AVE.M

OR

GAN

ST.

MO

RG

AN

AVE

.

VAN

DE

RV

OO

RT

AVE

.

PO

RTE

RAV

E.

VAR

ICK

AVE

.

STE

WA

RT

AVE

.

SC

OTT

AVE

.

GA

RD

NE

RAV

E.

LIRR

KIN

GSL

AND

AVE.

Visual Resource Assessment Introduction

Kosciuszko Bridge Project I-4 February 2007

Depict the views which would be affected by changes to the Kosciuszko Bridge;

Assess the visual impacts of the project alternatives; and

Suggest mitigation for adverse impacts.

The terms used in the VRA are included in a glossary for reference.

Kosciuszko Bridge Project II-1 February 16, 2007

Chapter II Existing Visual Environment This chapter establishes the existing visual environment by defining and identifying the project area, its visual character, viewers and their responses to the bridge and adjacent areas. Photographs of selected views of existing conditions taken from street level and the bridge are included for reference.

A. PROJECT AREA

The project area for the VRA encompasses the areas adjacent to the bridge that are viewed by motorists, residents and workers from adjacent streets, residences, industrial areas and while traveling over the bridge. These views include the approach and main span trusses, structural columns and closure walls. Visual districts within the project area were also established. These areas include the Kosciuszko Bridge and other areas adjacent to the bridge where changes in land use, topography and development levels are distinguishable by motorists traveling across the bridge. The limits of the visual resources study area and established districts are illustrated in Figure 2-1. These districts include:

Bridge District – includes the Kosciuszko Bridge itself, an elevated structure that extends from Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn to the LIE/BQE interchange in Queens. Throughout the 1.1 mile corridor that encompasses this district the bridge consists of the Queens Approach (deck truss), the Main Span (through truss) over Newtown Creek, the Brooklyn Approach (deck truss) and the Brooklyn Connector (concrete viaduct). Throughout the corridor, the Bridge varies from six to eight lanes in width. Access ramps are provided to/from Vandervoort Avenue in Brooklyn and to/from the LIE (I-495) in Queens.

Residential/Commercial District of Greenpoint and East Williamsburg – includes the communities of Greenpoint and East Williamsburg, which border the western limit of the project area. They consist of established, densely populated residential communities with supporting commercial businesses.

Newtown Creek Industrial Area District – includes areas located in both the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens that are adjacent to or near the shorelines of Newtown Creek. It is essentially a flat area with varied land uses, but predominately supports manufacturing, industrial, warehouse, storage yards, freight forwarding and some evidence of commercial and residential uses. Above ground storage tanks and railroad tracks are also notable features within this district.

Newtown Creek Waterway District - includes Newtown Creek as it separates the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens and passes beneath the Main Span of the Kosciuszko Bridge.

56RD

BQE

MONITOR STKINGSLAND AV

55A

V

REVIEWAV

54R

D

RUSSELL ST50ST

N HENRY ST

HUMBOLDT ST

43ST

54A

V

NA

SSA

UA

V

MORGAN AV LOM

BARD

YST

DR

IGG

SA

V

NO

RM

AN

AV

53A

V

CHER

RYST

VARICK AV

APOLLO ST

ENG

ERT

AV

JEWEL ST

SUTTON ST

DIAMOND ST

BEAD

ELST

DIVI

SIO

NPL

NEWEL ST

HAUSMAN ST

LIE

MOULTRIE ST

ANTH

ONY

ST

GARDNER AV

VANDERVOORT AV

54D

R

PORTER AV

VAN DAM ST

HER

BER

TST

BAYARDST

RIC

HARD

SON

STBRID

GEW

ATER

ST

VARICK

ST

BRO

OM

EST

STEWART AV

51R

D

THO

MA

SST

44ST

49ST

55AV

BQE

MEEKERAV

54AV

54RD

NO NAME

GRAHAM AV

55A

V

46ST

N HENRY ST

KO

SCIU

SZK

OB

RID

GE

NYC

DEP

Bas

emap

Cop

yrig

hted

by

City

of N

ew Y

ork

Dep

artm

ent o

f Env

ironm

enta

l Pr

otec

tion,

Sub

-lice

nsed

from

New

Yor

k S

tate

Dep

artm

ent o

f Tra

nspo

rtatio

n - R

egio

n 11

.

Figu

re 2

-1Vi

sual

Dis

trict

sNe

w Yo

rk S

tate

Depa

rtmen

t of T

rans

porta

tion

065

01,

300 Fe

et

015

030

0Met

ers

Proj

ect A

rea

Brid

ge D

istri

ctC

alva

ry C

emet

ery

Dis

trict

Com

mer

cial

Dis

trict

New

tow

n C

reek

Indu

stria

l Are

aN

ewto

wn

Cre

ek W

ater

way

Dis

trict

Res

iden

tial A

rea

Visual Resource Assessment Existing Visual Environment

Kosciuszko Bridge Project II-3 February 2007

Old Calvary Cemetery District – includes a large, open parcel of land that slopes slightly toward the BQE and is located in the northwest quadrant of the project area. This land consists entirely of the cemetery’s grassy areas with trees and monuments and narrow asphalt access roads.

B. VISUAL CHARACTER OF THE PROJECT AREA

The visual character of the project area consists of an urban setting which includes the Kosciuszko Bridge; the grassy hillside of Old Calvary Cemetery; varying size rooftops of rectilinear buildings within the manufacturing / industrial area; Newtown Creek; flat vacant land along the shoreline of Newtown Creek; and a mixed-use residential/commercial neighborhood. There are no substantial natural landscapes or architectural features within the project area that that are prominent enough to provide visual relief or interest to motorists using the BQE. As a result, motorists have unobstructed views of changes between Districts and distant views of the Brooklyn, Manhattan and Queens Skylines. Notable architectural elements within the project area may be visible to at-grade motorists, pedestrians/bicyclists, and workers. Aerial photographs depicting the bridge in relation to existing facilities are provided below:

FIGURE 2-2: AERIAL VIEW OF THE BROOKLYN APPROACH AND WESTBOUND EXIT RAMP

FIGURE 2-3: AERIAL VIEW OF THE MAIN SPAN ABOVE NEWTOWN CREEK LOOKING EAST

FIGURE 2-4: AERIAL VIEW OF THE BROOKLYN APPROACH LOOKING SOUTHWEST

FIGURE 2-5: AERIAL VIEW OF THE BROOKLYN CONNECTOR (CONCRETE VIADUCT AND CLOSURE WALL) AT VARICK AVENUE



FIGURE 2-6: AERIAL VIEW OF QUEENS APPROACH LOOKING EAST

FIGURE 2-7: AERIAL VIEW OF QUEENS APPROACH LOOKING NORTHEAST

C. VISUAL QUALITY OF PROJECT AREA

The project area is a densely populated urban environment with diverse uses. Reflecting the industrial history of the area, the dominant uses include: single story manufacturing and industrial buildings; open truck and storage yards and parking areas; vacant land adjacent to Newtown Creek; and the lack of green space and landscaping create unattractive views. To the west and north, the older residential neighborhoods of Greenpoint and East Williamsburg in Brooklyn are very dense with small, attached buildings and only a few community parks. The uniformity of building type and architecture within these residential areas provides some visual appeal.

The open green space within Old Calvary Cemetery and Sergeant William Dougherty Playground provides limited relief for viewers from the surrounding hardscape, very limited streetscape amenities (e.g., trees, planting areas, pavers, benches) are typically not present within the project area. The area beneath the bridge is inaccessible to the public as it usesd for private and leased storage of automotive related uses. In Brooklyn, a visually unattractive waste transfer station exists beneath and adjacent to the bridge. Newtown Creek separates and provides some visual relief from the industrial areas of Brooklyn and Queens.

The Kosciuszko Bridge is the most visually dominant feature of the area. The Main Span through truss of the bridge, above Newtown Creek, provides notable views from distant areas and for BQE motorists. The approach trusses, columns, Brooklyn Connector and closure walls are viewed by motorists, residents and workers within each visual district. The bridge and approaches are visually attractive during the daytime hours; however, at nighttime, the views of the bridge are minimal since architectural bridge lighting, beyond that required for the roadway, is not provided.

D. VIEWER GROUPS AND VIEWER EXPOSURE

Four major viewer groups have been identified based on observations of land use and travel patterns. While some of these viewer groups share similar if not identical views, the groups differ in their degree of sensitivity to the surrounding views due to viewer activity, awareness



and duration of viewing time. These viewer groups include: motorists (on the bridge and at-grade); residents; pedestrians (at street level); and retail, industrial, manufacturing, and warehouse workers. At present, pedestrians and bicyclists are not permitted on the existing bridge; discussion of views from this vantage point for these groups applies only to those alternatives that would provide bridge access for these groups.

Motorists

With almost 170,000 vehicles crossing the bridge daily, motorists traveling on the BQE make up the largest viewer group and have the greatest viewer exposure to the bridge and surrounding Districts. Drivers tend to be less sensitive to peripheral views than are passengers. Motorists traveling the local at-grade streets view the bridge approaches, main span, ramps and brick closure walls of the Brooklyn Connector from the side (elevation) and below. The duration of views for all motorists varies and depends on their speed of travel.

Sensitivity: Medium

Duration of View: Generally short, varies with travel speeds

Residents

Residents are highly sensitive to changes in their environment. The height of residential units as well as the elevation of the bridge influences their views. As the bridge rises toward the Main Span, the views of the structure from adjacent residences change from a side view of the ramps and brick closure walls to views of the structural support columns. The degree of visual sensitivity increases and becomes less desirable as the roadway obstructs sky views.

Sensitivity: High

Duration of view: Long

Pedestrians/Bicyclists

Since pedestrians at street level are not permitted on the bridge, they may only view the bridge from the surrounding areas. The sensitivity of the view would be similar to that of the residents; however, the duration of their views is less sustained, due to their rate of travel.

Sensitivity: High

Duration of View: Medium to Short

Boaters

Boaters view the bridge from the Newtown Creek. The sensitivity of the view would be similar to that of the residents; however, the duration of their views is less sustained, due to their rate of travel.

Sensitivity: High

Duration of View: Long



Retail, Industrial, Manufacturing and Warehouse Workers

The view sensitivity for retail, industrial, manufacturing and warehouse workers varies depending on their view duration and location. Sites closest to the bridge typically have views of the columns, ramps, abutments and deck truss while sites farther away observe distant side (elevation) views of the bridge approaches and main span. Since several businesses within the aforementioned districts have workers that spend substantial time outdoors, separate worker sensitivity levels are established. Workers who spend most of their workday indoors would have a lower sensitivity and shorter sustained views as they arrive and depart from work. Workers who spend the majority of their work day outdoors would experience higher viewing sensitivity, similar to that of pedestrians.

For Indoor Workers

Sensitivity: Low

Duration of View: Low

For Outdoor Workers

Sensitivity: Medium

Duration of View: Medium

E. VISUAL ENVIRONMENT OF VISUAL DISTRICTS

Sections E.1 to E.5 provide an analysis of each of the five visual districts. The sections include a general description of the district, which identifies important visual resources; the bridge, roadway, and building character as observed from that district; the viewer group(s) considered; the viewer’s perspectives (viewer position); the features viewed by each group; and comments on the quality of the view.

E.1. THE BRIDGE VISUAL DISTRICT

District Description

The Bridge District begins at the LIE interchange in Queens and extends to Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn. Within this district, BQE motorists view: the BQE travelway; the Main Span of the bridge, Old Calvary Cemetery, the Newtown Creek Industrial Area and the Greenpoint and East Williamsburg Communities. Additionally, the motorists can view the Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens Skylines in the distance (shown in Figures 2-8 through 2-14).



FIGURE 2-8: VIEW TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON THE BQE APPROACHING THE KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE

FIGURE 2-9: VIEW OF THE KOSCIUSKO BRIDGE MAIN SPAN THROUGH TRUSS

FIGURE 2-10: VIEW TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON THE BQE APPROACHING THE MORGAN AVENUE EXIT

FIGURE 2-11: VIEW TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON THE BQE AT THE MORGAN AVENUE EXIT



FIGURE 2-12: VIEW TRAVELING EASTBOUND ON THE BQE APPROACHING THE LIE/48TH

STREET EXIT

FIGURE 2-13: VIEW OF OLD CALVARY CEMETERY, NEWTOWN CREEK INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND THE MANHATTAN SKYLINE

FIGURE 2-14: VIEW OOKING WEST AT OLD CALVARY CEMETERY AND DISTANT VIEW OF THE MANHATTAN SKYLINE

Bridge Character

Within the project limits, the travelway is a divided highway, varying in width from six to eight travel lanes. From a motorist’s or passenger’s perspective, the view consists of roadway pavement, barriers, railings, lighting and signage. A motorist’s view of the structural portion of the bridge is limited to the main span through truss over Newtown Creek, with the duration of the view varying with travel speed. The through truss is a blue steel frame that varies in height from 10.4 meters (34 feet) to 13.2 meters (43 feet) above the travelway. Clear views of the main span structure are available as motorists approach the crest of the bridge. Distant views are somewhat limited because of the slope of the roadway. Striping and overhead signs advising of ramp connections are defined.

Proceeding from Queens towards Brooklyn, the bridge alignment is essentially straight with a slight curve to the right as it rises to the main span, a curve to the right beyond the main span as it approaches the Meeker Avenue exit ramp and a curve to the left beyond the ramp. Access



ramps are provided from the LIE interchange and Vandervoort Avenue. The travelway widens at the ramps to accommodate acceleration/deceleration areas.

The visual quality from within this district (Bridge Visual District) is determined by the views of the bridge and other districts that border the bridge, such as views of buildings with varying footprints and rooftops, storage yards, the Old Calvary Cemetery, Newtown Creek and distant views of the metropolitan area. Minimal visual relief from the bridge and urban environment is provided by views of the green space within Old Calvary Cemetery or from occasional neighborhood street trees.

Viewer Group: Motorists

Perspective: Motorists from the Bridge District encounter views of the travelway, Main Span through truss of the bridge, the surrounding districts, and distant views of the New York metropolitan area.

Features: Features viewed from this district include the travelway; the Main Span of the bridge; the Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn skylines; Newtown Creek; Old Calvary Cemetery; rooftops of manufacturing and industrial buildings; and densely populated residential neighborhoods.

View Quality: Motorists traveling across the bridge experience limited views of natural features and green space and primarily view the urban environment, the travelway and the manufacturing and industrial areas. The resulting visual quality of this district is low. The Main Span through truss of the bridge and the distant views of the Manhattan, Queens and Brooklyn Skylines provide some visual interest.

E.2. OLD CALVARY CEMETERY VISUAL DISTRICT


Old Calvary Cemetery, located in the borough of Queens, and west of the BQE, consists of a large tract of land that slopes toward the southeast. The cemetery is a large, open green space that provides visual and textural relief from the hardscape of roads and buildings in the surrounding areas.

Bridge Character

In this district, the bridge is viewed from the side (elevation) view. As shown in Figure 2-15, the elevation of the Queens Approach rises from the LIE interchange (left side of Figure) to the Main Span of the bridge, while the Brooklyn Approach descends toward the Brooklyn Connector (right side of Figure 2-15) in Brooklyn.

Viewer Group: Motorists, Pedestrians and Workers

Perspective: Perspective views of the bridge from this district include the elevation of the Queens Approach Truss (deck truss), the Main Span of the bridge and the access ramps from the LIE to the westbound BQE.



Features: Features viewed from this district include the open green space of Old Calvary Cemetery, the Queens and Brooklyn Approaches, the Main Span of the bridge and the supporting columns of the bridge.

View Quality: Unobstructed views of the bridge above the open space of the cemetery result in good visual quality (shown in Figure 2-16).

FIGURE 2-15: VIEWS FROM OLD CALVARY CEMETERY LOOKING SOUTHEAST AT THE QUEENS AND BROOKLYN APPROACHES AND THE MAIN SPAN OF THE BRIDGE

FIGURE 2-16: VIEW OF THE BRIDGE MAIN SPAN NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO OLD CALVARY CEMETERY

E.3 THE NEWTOWN CREEK INDUSTRIAL AREA VISUAL DISTRICT


The Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District, in both Brooklyn and Queens, is essentially a flat area located on both sides of the bridge and Newtown Creek. Land uses in this district are varied but they predominately include manufacturing, industrial, warehouse, storage yards and freight forwarding with some evidence of commercial and residential uses. Tracts of vacant land



exist along Newtown Creek and are also located sporadically throughout the district. The Long Island Railroad runs along the north side of Newtown Creek in Queens. Side (elevation) views of the bridge are visible from this district and include, the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches (deck truss), the Main Span (through truss), and supporting columns. These views can be seen from the local roads, cross streets, buildings and open areas within the district.

The buildings within the district range from one to three stories in height and are constructed of varying building materials. The storage yards are unsightly and the visible vacant tracts of land are flat, paved or unvegetated.

In Brooklyn the district includes manufacturing/industrial properties on both sides of the bridge (shown in Figure 2-17). There are no residences within the manufacturing / industrial zone. The district transitions into commercial and residential areas north and west of the bridge.

The Queens portion of the district is located on the north side of Newtown Creek in West Maspeth. This area includes various types of manufacturing / industrial properties and two sets of Long Island Railroad tracks along the north side of the Creek (shown in Figure 2-18). In addition, a few residences exist in the vicinity of 54th Road.

FIGURE 2-17: VIEW FROM NEWTOWN CREEK INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IN BROOKLYN AT THE INTERSECTION OF MEEKER AVENUE AND BRIDGEWATER STREET LOOKING NORTHEAST AT THE BRIDGE

FIGURE 2-18: VIEW FROM NEWTOWN CREEK INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT IN QUEENS EAST OF NEWTOWN CREEK LOOKING NORTHWEST AT THE BRIDGE

Bridge Character

In this district, the bridge character is similar to that of the Old Calvary Cemetery District since the bridge is seen from the side (elevation) view and underneath. The Brooklyn and Queens Approaches are seen rising to the Main Span from the LIE interchange in Queens and the Brooklyn Connector and BQE access ramps in Brooklyn (shown in Figures 2-19 and 2-20).



FIGURE 2-19: VIEW OF THE QUEENS APPROACH FROM LAUREL HILL BOULEVARD & 56TH ROAD

FIGURE 2-20: VIEW OF QUEENS APPROACH AND MAIN SPAN LOOKING SOUTHWEST FROM LAUREL HILL BOULEVARD & 54TH ROAD



Viewer Groups: Industrial, Manufacturing and Warehouse Workers, Motorists, Pedestrians, and Residents.

Perspective: Perspective views of the bridge from this district include views of the Queens and Brooklyn Approaches (deck truss) the Main Span (through truss), at-grade streets, buildings and open spaces.

Features: Features viewed from this district include the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches, the Main Span and structural elements of the bridge, such as the red brick bridge abutments, concrete columns and steel piers. The surrounding industrial buildings, which differ in size and materials, and the storage facilities, which contain different types of industrial materials, can also be seen by all viewer groups (shown in Figures 2-21 and 2-22).

View Quality: The quality of views of the bridge can be measured by the duration of the view and the physical features that frame the view. Due to the lack of natural visual relief, the lack of uniformity in building type and size, and the clutter of storage facilities within this district the visual quality is low.

FIGURE 2-21: VIEW OF THE BROOKLYN CONNECTOR CLOSURE WALLS AT CHERRY STREET AND VARICK AVENUE

FIGURE 2-22: VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST AT THE BROOKLYN APPROACH DECK TRUSS FROM CHERRY STREET

E.4. THE NEWTOWN CREEK WATERWAY VISUAL DISTRICT


The Newtown Creek Waterway forms the boundary between the Boroughs of Queens and Brooklyn. The Main Span of the bridge carries the BQE over the Creek thereby linking the two boroughs. The waterway provides waterborne access to industrial businesses that border its shores.



Roadway Character

In this district, the bridge can be seen by the viewer from the side (elevation) and below (shown in Figure 2-23).

FIGURE 2-23: VIEWS OF THE APPROACHES AND BRIDGE FROM NEWTOWN CREEK

Viewer Groups: Boaters

Perspective: Perspective views of the bridge from this district include views of the Queens and Brooklyn Approaches (deck truss), the Main Span (through truss), supporting concrete columns and steel piers.

Features: Features viewed from this district include Newtown Creek, the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches, the Main Span of the bridge, supporting piers and the surrounding industrial buildings, storage yards and vacant land.

View Quality: The view of the Main Span and approaches is a dominant feature of the landscape. The Newtown Creek waterway provides some visual relief from the deteriorated shoreline, but the overall visual quality of this district is poor due to the lack of natural visual relief such as landscape to observe.

E.5. RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF THE GREENPOINT AND EAST WILLIAMSBURG COMMUNITIES IN BROOKLYN


The Brooklyn Connector divides the north and south sides of the Greenpoint and East Williamsburg communities, which primarily consist of two and three story row houses, shops and restaurants. Parks within the district include Sergeant William Dougherty Playground, a small pocket park adjacent to the bridge, and Monsignor McGolrick Park, a community park a few blocks away from the bridge (shown in Figures 2-24 and 2-25).



FIGURE 2-24: RESIDENCES ON MEEKER AVENUE ADJACENT TO THE BROOKLYN CONNECTOR

FIGURE 2-25: VIEW OF SERGEANT WILLIAM DOUGHERTY PLAYGROUND AND THE BROOKLYN CONNECTOR

Bridge Character

In this visual district, the Brooklyn Connector is viewed from the side (elevation) and is most dominant when the viewer is directly adjacent to the structure. Views of the Main Span of the bridge over Newtown Creek are generally blocked by adjacent buildings (shown in Figures 2-26 and 2-27).

FIGURE 2-26: VIEW OF BROOKLYN CONNECTOR AND RESIDENCES ON MEEKER AVENUE FROM THE WESTBOUND EXIT RAMP LOOKING SOUTHWEST

FIGURE 2-27: VIEW OF THE BROOKLYN CONNECTOR AT THE INTERSECTION OF CHERRY STREET AND MORGAN AVENUE LOOKING NORTHEAST



Viewer Groups: Motorists, Pedestrians, Residents, and Workers from the Commercial Businesses.

Perspective: Perspective views of the bridge from this district include side (elevation) views of the Brooklyn Connector from at-grade streets and sidewalks, residences, commercial businesses and a few open spaces. Vertical walls enclose the structure and ramps, thereby limiting views beneath the structure to locations where the structure spans over through streets.

Features: The features viewed from this district include the structural features of the Brooklyn Connector, such as the red brick closure walls, concrete abutments and concrete parapets, two to three story row houses, commercial/retail establishments and streets with on-street parking (shown in Figures 2-28 and 2-29).

View Quality: In this district, the viewer at ground level sees the Brooklyn Connector from along side or from approaching cross streets. The hard fixed structure is dominant with minimal natural visual relief provided from streetscape amenities. The resulting poor visual quality is less apparent as the viewer moves farther away into the residential and commercial areas of the District.

FIGURE 2-28: VIEW OF BROOKLYN CONNECTOR ADJACENT TO RESIDENCES LOOKING EAST ON MEEKER AVENUE FROM HAUSMAN STREET

FIGURE 2-29: VIEW AT THE INTERSECTION OF MORGAN AVENUE AND MEEKER AVENUE LOOKING SOUTH

F. VIEWS OF THE KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE FROM AREAS BEYOND THE SPECIFIC VISUAL DISTRICTS

In addition to the specified visual districts, there are several locations from which the bridge and its approaches are visible. The views from these locations are distant (typically ranging from a half-mile to two miles), and the visual impact of any proposed project modifications would be considered minimal. Distant locations providing views of the bridge include:



Sunnyside, Queens, a residential neighborhood north of the project site. The bridge can be seen from approximately a half mile away by viewers looking south on 39th Street (shown in Figure 2-30).

FIGURE 2-30: DISTANT VIEWS OF THE BRIDGE LOOKING SOUTH FROM 39TH STREET IN SUNNYSIDE, QUEENS

Long Island Expressway. Motorists can view the bridge while traveling eastbound from the Queens Midtown Tunnel or westbound toward the BQE Interchange. The duration of their view is typically short due to their rate of travel and view obstructions (shown in Figure 2-31).

The J. J. Byrne Memorial Bridge (Greenpoint Avenue). Located approximately three quarters of a mile northwest of the project site, the bridge provides views of the Kosciuszko Bridge for motorists and pedestrians as they cross over Newtown Creek (shown in Figure 2-32).

FIGURE 2-31: VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST AT THE BRIDGE WHILE TRAVELING WESTBOUND ON THE LIE

FIGURE 2-32: VIEW LOOKING EAST AT THE BRIDGE WHILE TRAVELING EASTBOUND ON THE J.J. BYRNE MEMORIAL BRIDGE (GREENPOINT AVENUE)



The Pulaski Bridge (McGuinnes Boulevard). Located approximately one and a half miles northwest of the Kosciuszko Bridge, the Pulaski Bridge provides a distinct view of the bridge for motorists and pedestrians crossing over Newtown Creek (shown in Figure 2-33).

FIGURE 2-33: DISTANT VIEW OF THE BRIDGE WHILE TRAVELING ON THE PULASKI BRIDGE AND LOOKING EAST

Grover Cleveland Park. This neighborhood park in Ridgewood, Queens, is approximately one and a half miles southeast of the bridge. Park users view the side (elevation) of the bridge from this location (shown in Figure 2-34).

Mount Olivet Cemetery. This cemetery in Maspeth, Queens, is approximately one and three quarter miles east of the bridge. Distant views of the bridge can be seen from this location (shown in Figure 2-35).



FIGURE 2-34: DISTANT VIEW LOOKING WEST AT THE BRIDGE FROM GROVER CLEVELAND PARK IN RIDGEWOOD, QUEENS

FIGURE 2-35: DISTANT VIEW LOOKING WEST AT THE BRIDGE FROM MOUNT OLIVET CEMETERY IN MASPETH, QUEENS

G. SELECTION OF KEY VIEWPOINTS

Twelve key viewpoints within the five districts were selected as representative of views from the bridge, project area, and visual districts:

Viewpoint 1 – View from the westbound Queens approach looking toward the Kosciuszko Bridge main span (Bridge Visual District)

Viewpoint 2 – View from the westbound Queens approach looking toward the Manhattan and Brooklyn skylines (Bridge Visual District)

Viewpoint 3 – View from the eastbound Brooklyn approach looking toward the Kosciuszko Bridge main span (Bridge Visual District)

Viewpoint 4 – View from the eastbound Brooklyn approach looking toward the southeast in Brooklyn (Bridge Visual District)

Viewpoint 5 – View from Old Calvary Cemetery (Queens) looking southeast at the Queens approach and Kosciuszko Bridge main span (Old Calvary Cemetery District)

Viewpoint 6 – View from Laurel Hill Boulevard (Queens) looking south towards the Queens approach and Kosciuszko Bridge main span (Old Calvary Cemetery Visual District)

Viewpoint 7 – View from 56th Road and 43rd Street (Queens) of the Kosciuszko bridge main span (Residential and Commercial District)

Viewpoint 8 – View from the Newtown Creek Waterway looking northwest at the Brooklyn approach and Kosciuszko Bridge main span (Newtown Creek Waterway District)



Viewpoint 9 – View from the intersection of Anthony Street and Vandervoort Avenue in (East Williamsburg) looking north at the Brooklyn Connector (Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District)

Viewpoint 10 – View from the westbound exit ramp looking southwest along Meeker Avenue toward Apollo Street (Residential and Commercial District)

Viewpoint 11 – View from the intersection of Meeker Avenue and Morgan Avenue looking northeast along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District)

Viewpoint 12 – View from the intersection of Hausman Street and Meeker Avenue looking east along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District).

The twelve viewpoints were considered to be the most representative within the project area due to their accessibility and likelihood of impact to the most number of viewer groups. The locations of these viewpoints are shown in Figure 2-36.

! (! (

! (

! (! (

! (

! (

! (

! (! (

! (

! (

911

3

0 121

8

6

5

17

2

4

MC GUINNESS BLVD S

56RD

MONITOR ST

KINGSLAND AV

NA

SSA

UA

V

N HENRY ST

MORGAN AV

DR

IGG

SA

V

LOM

BAR

DY

ST

JEWEL ST

VARICK AV

CHER

RYST

37ST

APOLLO ST

SUTTON ST

GREE

NPOI

NTAV

HAUSMAN ST

MOULTRIE ST

ANTH

ON

YST

STARR AV

34ST

LAURELHILLBL

GRE

ENPO

INT

AV

MEEKERAV

48ST

KO

SCIU

SZK

OB

RID

GE

BEAD

ELST

VANDERVOORT AV

VAN DAM STVAN DAM STVANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

VANDAMST

BRID

GEW

ATER

ST

BRADLEY AV

BRADLEY AV

BRADLEY AV

KINGS

LAND

AVE

SCOTT AV

REVIEW

AVE

35ST

NEWTOW

NCRE

EK

50ST

55AV54

DR

54A

V

54R

D

53AV

43ST

44ST

46ST 48ST

49ST

PAGEPL49LA

41ST

42ST

44ST

45ST

46ST

47ST

48ST

LIE

Que

ens

App

roac

h(D

eck

Trus

s)

Mai

n Sp

an(D

eck

& T

hrou

gh T

russ

)

Bro

okly

n A

ppro

ach

(Dec

k Tr

uss)

Bro

okly

n C

onne

ctor

(Con

cret

e Vi

aduc

t)Mee

kerAve

.

Viaduc

t

LIE

Inte

rcha

nge

Proj

ect L

imit

Proj

ect L

imit

NYC

DEP

Bas

emap

Cop

yrig

hted

by

City

of N

ew Y

ork

Dep

artm

ent o

f Env

ironm

enta

l Pr

otec

tion,

Sub

-lice

nsed

from

New

Yor

k St

ate

Dep

artm

ent o

f Tra

nspo

rtatio

n - R

egio

n 11

.

Figu

re 2

-36

View

poin

tsNe

w Yo

rk S

tate

Depa

rtmen

t of T

rans

porta

tion

050

01,

000 Fe

et

015

030

0Met

ers



Viewpoint 1 – View from the Westbound Queens Approach looking toward the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Bridge Visual District)

The first viewpoint selected is from a motorist’s perspective while traveling westbound on the Queens Approach toward the Main Span of the Kosciuszko Bridge. This view was selected because of the high number of motorists whose views of the travelway and bridge will be affected with the bridge widening, elevation changes and removal of the main span through truss (shown in Figure 2-37).

FIGURE 2-37: VIEWPOINT 1



Viewpoint 2 – View from the westbound Queens Approach looking toward the Manhattan skyline (Bridge Visual District)

The second viewpoint selected is from the westbound Queens Approach (near the Main Span) looking toward the Manhattan skyline. It is from the perspective of a motorist, within the Bridge Visual District. This view would be lowered for and moved slightly toward the west motorists under Build Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5 (shown in Figure 2-38). This view would become visible to a new user group of pedestrians and bicyclists.




Viewpoint 3 – View from the Eastbound Brooklyn Approach toward the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Bridge Visual District)

The third viewpoint selected is from the perspective of a motorist traveling eastbound on the Brooklyn Approach toward the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span. This view includes details of the Main Span through truss, light and bridge rail treatments, as well as the relationship of the eastbound and westbound travelways. Motorists’ views of the travelway and bridge would be affected by the bridge widening, elevation changes and removal of the Main Span through truss (shown in Figure 2-39).




Viewpoint 4 – View from the eastbound Brooklyn Approach looking southwest (Bridge Visual District)

The fourth viewpoint selected is from the eastbound Brooklyn Approach (near the Main Span) looking in the southwest direction toward Brooklyn. While this perspective is not readily available to motorists, pedestrians or bicyclists, it illustrates a perspective that would be visible under the Build Alternative RA-5 (shown in Figure 2-40). Under RA-5, the bikeway/walkway would be constructed adjacent the eastbound (eastern) side of the Main Span.




Viewpoint 5 – View from Old Calvary Cemetery (Queens) Looking Southeast at the Queens Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Old Calvary Cemetery District)

The fifth viewpoint, from Old Calvary Cemetery, is an eastbound elevation (side) view of the Queens Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span. The viewer observes a panoramic view of the bridge including profile. The views would be affected by profile changes, through truss and deck truss removal and column locations (shown in Figure 2-41).




Viewpoint 6 – View from Laurel Hill Boulevard (Queens) Looking South towards the Queens Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Old Calvary Cemetery Visual District)

The sixth viewpoint selected is from Laurel Hill Boulevard directly adjacent to the Queens Approach. A viewer from Old Calvary Cemetery or motorist traveling on Laurel Hill Boulevard would have close views of the existing concrete columns, deck truss and at-grade streets and a distant view of the Main Span through truss. This view will be affected by the horizontal and vertical alignment of the alternatives, the relationship between the new bridge and Laurel Hill Boulevard, structure type, column locations, surface treatments and landscape amenities provided (shown in Figure 2-42).




Viewpoint 7 – View from 56th Road and 43rd Street (Queens) of the Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Residential and Commercial District)

The seventh viewpoint selected is a southwest elevation view of the Main Span through truss, approaches, existing concrete columns and steel piers, from a motorist, pedestrian, and worker perspective from the Newtown Creek Industrial Visual District. This view will be affected by the horizontal and vertical alignment of the alternatives, the structure type, column locations and design treatments incorporated in the alternatives (shown in Figure 2-43).




Viewpoint 8 – View from the Newtown Creek Waterway Looking Northwest at the Brooklyn Approach and Kosciuszko Bridge Main Span (Newtown Creek Waterway District)

The eighth viewpoint selected is a distant view of the approach deck truss, Main Span through truss and steel piers from a boater’s perspective from the Newtown Creek District. The view would be affected by structure type, profile and column spacing (shown in Figure 2-44).




Viewpoint 9 – View from the Intersection of Anthony Street and Vandervoort Avenue in (East Williamsburg) Looking North at the Brooklyn Connector (Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District)

The ninth viewpoint selected is a north view of the Brooklyn Connector at Vandervoort Avenue from a motorist, pedestrian and park user perspective within the Residential and Commercial District. The roadway is also seen in elevation beyond the sycamore shade trees of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground as the road continues east. The effects of the design alternatives on Vandervoort Avenue and the playground and the widening of the Brooklyn Connector will be most visible from this viewpoint than the others selected for analysis (shown in Figure 2-45).




Viewpoint 10 – View from the Westbound Exit Ramp Looking Southwest Along Meeker Avenue toward Apollo Street (Residential and Commercial District)

The tenth viewpoint selected is of the closure walls along the Brooklyn Connector, at Vandervoort Avenue, at-grade streets and adjacent residences from a resident, pedestrian or motorist perspective from the Residential and Commercial District. Residents have the longest duration of view and are therefore most sensitive to the view due to visibility and the time it takes to travel through this viewpoint. The view would be affected by the structure type, closure wall treatment, abutment and parapet treatment, at-grade intersection re-alignments, streetscape amenities and the creation of additional landscape buffer areas adjacent to the residences (shown in Figure 2-46).




Viewpoint 11 – View from the Intersection of Meeker Avenue and Morgan Avenue looking Northeast along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District)

The eleventh viewpoint selected is of the closure walls along the Brooklyn Connector, at Morgan Avenue, at-grade streets and adjacent businesses from the perspective of a motorist, pedestrian and resident within the Resident / Commercial District. This view would be affected by the structure type, closure wall treatment, abutment and parapet treatment, widening of the Brooklyn Connector over Meeker Avenue, and streetscape amenities (shown in Figure 2-47).




Viewpoint 12 – View from the Intersection of Hausman Street and Meeker Avenue Looking East along the Brooklyn Connector (Residential and Commercial District)

The twelfth viewpoint selected is of the Brooklyn Connector adjacent to the residences looking east on Meeker Avenue from Hausman Street. It is from the perspective of a motorist, pedestrian and resident within the Resident/Commercial District. This view would be affected by the structure type, closure wall treatment, abutment and parapet treatment, widening of the Brooklyn Connector toward the residences, and streetscape amenities (shown in Figure 2-48).


Kosciuszko Bridge Project III-1 February 2007

Chapter III PROJECT ELEMENTS

A. INTRODUCTION

This chapter will briefly describe: project build alternatives; design features and improvements common to all alternatives and specific to an alternative; proposed streetscape improvements; and proposed open space park elements in each of the build alternatives.

Each of the project alternatives are anticipated to impact the viewpoints and visual districts in some manner. As a result, a discussion of the alternatives considered for the project is discussed.

B. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

The six build alternatives and No Build alternative were developed in part to consider the need to alleviate the high traffic volume, address existing non-standard roadway features and improve vehicular safety. Six alternatives are under consideration, including one No Build Alternative, two Rehabilitation with Auxiliary Lanes Alternatives (RA) and three Bridge Replacement Alternatives (BR). The following is a brief description of each alternative.

The No Build Alternative would make no physical or operational improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge and continue NYSDOT’s maintenance program. The existing bridge, with its steep grades, narrow lane widths, and non-standard shoulders, would remain as it is today.

Alternative RA-5 would rehabilitate the existing bridge and construct a new parallel bridge on the eastbound side. The new parallel bridge would be built at a lower elevation to allow for lower grades. When completed, the new bridge would carry three lanes of eastbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. The existing bridge would continue to carry six lanes of traffic (2 eastbound, 4 westbound), maintaining the existing narrow lane widths and non-standard (narrow) shoulders.

Alternative RA-6 would rehabilitate the existing bridge and construct a new parallel bridge on the westbound side. The new parallel bridge would be built at a lower elevation to allow for lower grades. When completed, the new bridge would carry three lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. The existing bridge would continue to carry six lanes of traffic (4 eastbound, 2 westbound), maintaining the existing narrow lane widths and non-standard (narrow) shoulders.

Alternative BR-2 would replace the existing bridge by building new parallel bridges on both sides of the existing bridge – one temporary, one permanent. The new bridge would be built at a lower elevation to allow for lower grades. When completed, the new bridge would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. The old bridge would be demolished.

Visual Resource Assessment Project Elements


Alternative BR-3 would replace the existing bridge by building new permanent, parallel bridges on both sides of the existing bridge. The new bridges would be built at a lower elevation to allow for lower grades. When completed, the new bridges would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. The old bridge would be demolished.

Alternative BR-5 would replace the existing bridge by building a new permanent, parallel bridge on the eastbound side of the existing bridge. The new bridge would be built at a lower elevation to allow for lower grades. When completed, the new bridge would carry five lanes of eastbound traffic and four lanes of westbound traffic and have standard lane widths and shoulders. The old bridge would be demolished.

C. BUILD ALTERNATIVES DESIGN FEATURES

C.1. DESIGN FEATURES COMMON TO ALL BUILD ALTERNATIVES

In addition to the features of the five Build Alternatives which include updating roadway features and improving vehicular safety, other design features would be considered to improve the appearance of the bridge, provide at-grade streetscape and park amenities and provide new opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle transportation.

All alternatives would consist of four or five traffic lanes in each direction, a walkway/bikeway, and bridge enhancements such as new lighting, railing, curbs, signage and drainage.

Throughout the entire project limits, certain landscape improvements will be made that are not contingent upon the details of any specific alternative. These will include: a comprehensive package of streetscape enhancements; a newly landscaped plaza at Meeker Avenue at Van Dam Street; the reconstruction of the Brooklyn Connector closure walls; the architectural treatment package of the retaining walls on the Brooklyn and Queens ramps; potential new pedestrian crossing beneath the Brooklyn Connector at Hausman Street; a new multi-use bikeway/walkway across the Newtown Creek along with improvements to the Newtown Creek shoreline beneath the main span.

In addition, landscape plantings will be utilized to enhance the overall project area, improve areas that are reclaimed as part of the project’s construction, help better define the pedestrian access ways to the waterfront, improve the visual context of the neighborhood character as well as used as buffering and screening for residents with undesirable views of traffic. The location and limits of urban design elements are illustrated on Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3.

Brooklyn Connector Closure Walls and Retaining Walls at the Brooklyn and Queens Ramps

For all build alternatives, the curtain walls that enclose the areas underneath the Brooklyn Connector between Morgan Avenue and Van Dam Street will be reconstructed to increase the setback between the wall and curb, thereby providing additional sidewalk areas contiguous to the walls. The closure walls and retaining walls will also receive an architectural treatment shown in Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3, Architectural Treatment of Closure Walls.

2

3



Pedestrian Portal at Hausman Street

All build alternatives will create a new pedestrian access way beneath the Brooklyn Connector at Hausman Street. This new portal will be provided through the closure walls of the Brooklyn Approach to facilitate movement between the east and west sides of Meeker Avenue. The portal will provide an additional location where pedestrians may cross beneath the highway. Convenient, inter-neighborhood connectivity will be improved as residents of the neighborhoods flanking the Brooklyn Connector will have an alternative to the congested intersections at Meeker Avenue/Morgan Avenues and Vandervoort/Apollo Streets. This new access will make the ballfields and Sergeant William Dougherty Park on the east side of the roadway more accessible to neighborhood residents located on the opposite side of the Brooklyn Connector, an area that comprises the majority of the area’s population.

Multi-use Bikeway/Walkway Across Newtown Creek

A continuous bikeway/walkway is proposed as part of the bridge under all alternatives except RA-6. Under all alternatives, the bikeway/walkway would include lighting, decorative and protective railings, and pavement markings. The bikeway/walkway would expand the New York City bike path network by creating a new north-south connection, linking the neighborhoods in Queens and Brooklyn and providing a dedicated location for alternative means of transportation. The location of the bikeway/walkway, on the east or west side of the bridge, will depend on the alternative. Alternatives where the bikeway/walkway could be located on the west side of the bridge would allow views of the Manhattan Skyline

For Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5, the bikeway/walkway will be on the westbound side of the roadway. For Alternative RA-5, it will be located on the eastbound side of the roadway.

In Brooklyn, the bikeway/walkway will come down to grade along with the westbound exit ramp for Meeker Avenue. From there, bikeway/walkway users would utilize Varick and Anthony Streets and Morgan and Driggs Avenues to access the Manhattan Avenue/Leonard Street bikeway.

In Queens, the new bikeway/walkway would connect to the existing helix ramp that provides access to 43rd Street and Laurel Hill Boulevard via an aerial crossing of the eastbound LIE to the BQE access ramps. Once at grade, bikeway/walkway users may travel along Laurel Hill Boulevard to connect with the existing bikeway at the intersection of Laurel Hill Boulevard and 56th Road. Other connection opportunities include a Laurel Hill Boulevard to 54th Avenue under the Queens Approach to 48th Street where access beneath the LIE to other neighborhoods throughout Queens exists. All the proposed bikeway/walkway connections take into consideration the City’s existing Bikeway Master Plan routes.

Bridge Lighting

Architectural lighting to enhance the form of the bridge and pedestrian lighting of the walkway / bikeway would be considered for all alternatives. The lighting would supplement required roadway lighting, provide additional opportunities for distant views of the bridge during nighttime and provide safety and protection for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Protective Railing



A protective railing system would protect users, be designed to enhance the view of the bridge architecture and provide relief from the expanse of the roadway pavement when viewed from the bridge.

Median Barriers

Median barriers between the eastbound and westbound lanes would be constructed on Alternatives RA-5 and RA-6. On Alternatives BR-2, BR-3, and BR-5 eastbound and westbound traffic would be on separate bridges.

C.2. DESIGN FEATURES SPECIFIC TO BUILD ALTERNATIVES

The following is a brief description of each of the Alternatives and their notable components. For a full description of the project alternatives, see Chapter III of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

Rehabilitation with Auxiliary Lanes Alternatives (RA Alternatives) - Common Design Features

The existing approaches and bridge would be rehabilitated at the existing width and profile.

The deck truss and through truss, concrete columns and steel piers of the existing structure would remain.

The Queens ramps and BQE mainline would be reconstructed between 54th Road and the LIE interchange.

The existing access ramps to/from Vandervoort Avenue would be reconstructed.

The Brooklyn Connector which spans above Varick Avenue, Apollo Street/Vandervoort Avenue and Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn would be replaced.

The closure walls between Varick Avenue and Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn would be replaced.

A walkway / bikeway would be provided between Brooklyn and Queens.

Architectural features such as lighting, railing and other architectural support details would be included.

The eastbound ramp from Meeker Avenue would be widened to two (2) lanes and Cherry Street would be re-aligned to the south of the new ramp between Vandervoort Avenue and Varick Avenue.

Alternative RA-5 Specific Design Features



A new eastbound bridge, 20.4 meters (67 feet) wide, would be constructed on the eastbound side of the existing bridge. The approximate structure depth would vary from 3.0 meters (10 feet) to 7.6 meters (25 feet).

At Newtown Creek, the main span of the new parallel bridge would be approximately 8.3 meters (27 feet) lower than the existing bridge. The ramp connections in Queens and Brooklyn would meet existing grades.

Five (5) eastbound and four (4) westbound travel lanes would be provided. The total width of the two structures would increase from approximately 27.4 meters (90 feet) to 49.7 meters (163 feet), inclusive of the 1.8 meters (6 ) space between them.

New varying height columns would be located beneath the new structure. Approximately 15 new columns varying in cross section from 1.2 meters x 1.2 meters (4’ x 4’) to 3 meters x 6 meters (10’x 20’) would be provided.

The eastbound side of the existing Brooklyn Connector would be widened by 5.2 meters (17 feet) from Kingsland/Grandparents Avenue to Varick Avenue. The widened portion of the Brooklyn Connector would be located above the eastbound travel lanes of Meeker Avenue.

Alternative RA-6 Specific Design Features

A new westbound bridge, 16.5 meters (54 feet) wide, would be constructed on the westbound side of the existing bridge. The approximate structure depth would vary from 3.0 meters (10 feet) to 7.6 meters (25 feet).

At Newtown Creek, the main span of the new parallel bridge would be approximately 8.3 meters (27 feet) lower than the existing bridge. The ramp connections in Queens and Brooklyn would meet existing grades.

Four (4) eastbound and five (5) westbound travel lanes would be provided. The total width of the two structures would increase from approximately 27.4 meters (90 feet) to 45.7 meters (150 feet) inclusive of the 1.8 meters (6 ) space between them.

New varying height columns would be located beneath the new structure. Approximately 15 new columns varying in cross section from 1.2 meters x 1.2 meters (4’ x 4’) to 3 meters x 6 meters (10'x 20') would be provided.

Along the frontage of Old Calvary Cemetery, the westbound structure would be located above the travel lanes of Laurel Hill Boulevard. The vertical clearance between the undersides of the proposed structure to the roadbed of Laurel Hill Boulevard varies from 4.4 meters (14.5 feet) to 21 meters (69 feet).

Bridge Replacement Alternatives (BR Alternatives) - Common Design Features

The existing bridge, ramps, columns, etc. would be demolished and replaced with new structures.

The number of travel lanes would consist of five (5) eastbound and four (4) westbound lanes.



At Newtown Creek, the Main Span of the new Bridges would be 8.5 meters (28 feet) lower than the existing bridge.

The Brooklyn Connector would be widened by 5.2 meters (17 feet) to provide an eastbound auxiliary lane between Kingsland Avenue and Varick Avenue. The widened portion of the Brooklyn Connector would be located above the eastbound travel lanes of Meeker Avenue.

The eastbound on-ramp from Meeker Avenue would re-aligned and widened to two lanes and Cherry Street would be re-aligned between Vandervoort Avenue and Stewart Avenue.

The column spacing of the Main Span at the Newtown Creek crossing would be 121.9 meters (400 feet). The column spacing along the approaches would vary from 61 meters (120 feet) to 121.9 meters (400 feet).

In Brooklyn, the bridge abutment would be located between Varick Avenue and Stewart Avenue and in Queens the bridge abutment would be located east of 54th

Avenue.

The approach and Main Span structure depth would vary from 3.0 meters (10 feet) to 7.6 meters (25 feet).

The Brooklyn Connector, which spans above Varick Avenue, Apollo Street/Vandervoort Avenue and Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn would be replaced.

The existing closure walls between Varick Avenue and Morgan Avenue in Brooklyn would be replaced.

The BQE mainline between 54th Road and the LIE interchange would be re-aligned to accommodate the proposed bridge widening.

A walkway / bikeway would be provided between Brooklyn and Queens.

Architectural features such as lighting, railing and other architectural details would be included.

Alternative BR-2 Specific Design Features

Three new structures would be constructed. The width of the structures would vary from 12.8 meters (42 feet) to 24.1 meters (79 feet). The structures would be separated by 1.8 meters (6 feet). The total combined width of the structures would be approximately 57.0 meters (187 feet) inclusive of the space between them.

The new westbound bridge plus one of the new bridges would be within the footprint of the existing bridge. The remaining new eastbound bridge would be east of the existing bridge.




Three separate bridges would be constructed. The width of the bridges would vary from 12.8 meters (42 feet) to 24.1 meters (79 feet). The eastbound bridges would be separated by 1.8 meters (6 feet). A distance of 9.8 meters (32 feet) would separate the eastbound and westbound bridges. The total width fascia to fascia of the structures would be approximately 64.9 meters (213 feet), inclusive of the space between them.

Approximately one third (1/3) of the new structure would be within the footprint of the existing bridge. The westbound bridge would be located west of the existing bridge and approximately half of the eastbound structure would be located east of the existing bridge.

Along the frontage of Old Calvary Cemetery, the westbound bridge is located above the travel lanes of Laurel Hill Boulevard. The vertical clearance between the undersides of the proposed Bridge to the roadbed of Laurel Hill Boulevard varies from 3.8 meters (12.6 feet) to 20.2 meters (66 feet).


Three new bridges would be constructed. The width of the bridges would vary from 13.7 meters (46 feet) to 24.1 meters (79 feet) and the bridges would be separated by 1.8 meters (6 feet). The total combined width fascia to fascia of the structures would be 58.2 meters (191 feet) inclusive of the space between them.

The new westbound bridge would be located within the footprint of the existing bridge. The two eastbound bridges would be located east of the existing bridge.

The Brooklyn Connector would be re-aligned toward the south between Kingsland Avenue and Varick Avenue.

The intersection of Meeker Avenue, the westbound exit ramp and Vandervoort Avenue would be reconstructed on a new alignment.

The BQE mainline at the LIE interchange would be re-aligned to accommodate the eastbound widening of the viaduct.

Additional buffer areas would be available between Laurel Hill Boulevard and the bridge and between the bridge and residential buildings fronting Meeker Avenue

D. STREETSCAPE & LANDSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS

Each of the proposed build alternatives would include construction of new streetscape and landscape elements along selected local streets within the project area. Throughout the entire project limits, areas disturbed either by new construction or the removal of existing structures immediately adjacent to the connecting approach roadways or the main span will be restored in-kind or improved as appropriate (shown in Figure 3-4). Areas receiving new landscaping will re-establish existing habitat or create new habitat, prevent erosion and/or add aesthetics to the

New York StateDepartment of Transportation

Figure 3-4Conceptual Open Space Opportunities



area. Items that would be used will include new trees, shrubs, perennials, grasses and other appropriate landscape materials. Sidewalk areas of local streets paralleling or crossing beneath the structure will be reconstructed and receive a comprehensive streetscape improvement package that will include new decorative sidewalks, street trees, decorative crosswalks, pedestrian lighting, signage and other streetscape amenities.

E. PARKS FACILITIES AND PARKLANDS

In addition to improvements to existing streets with the proposed streetscape and landscaping elements, NYSDOT proposes improvements to existing parks and playgrounds, as well as the creation of new parks and open spaces in both Brooklyn and Queens.

Anticipating the necessity to acquire and use both publicly and privately held property within the project area, NYSDOT seeks to re-use the properties for new community use is the creation of new parks and/or adding to and improving existing parks for the benefit of the community.

Sergeant William Dougherty Playground (Brooklyn)

All build alternatives are anticipated to have a physical impact on Sergeant William Dougherty Park requiring reconstruction of the existing facility (for a more complete discussion of the impacts issue, please refer to the Section 4(f) Appendix Document of the DEIS). The existing conditions for the park are shown in Figure 2-42 (photo of existing park, Viewpoint 6). The industrial property immediately to the east of the existing park will be acquired under each alternative and, following the construction of the alternative, to create a larger park with new improvements throughout the site. The net increase in park varies with each alternative, but ranges from 3600 SM to 6200 SM.

All Alternatives Except BR-5

For all alternatives except BR-5, a reconstituted Sergeant William Dougherty Playground will be larger than the existing playground. The newly reconstructed playground will maintain both passive and active recreation programmatic elements. Many of the existing mature London Plane trees will be saved under the proposed concept design. Additional planting will be located along the street edge to provide a buffer between park users and the adjacent streets.

Based on several coordination meetings with representatives from New York City Department of Parks and Recreation (NYCDPR) Capital Projects group, components of the reconstructed park may include: basketball courts, handball courts, a dog run, a skate park, play equipment, a water play area and seating areas. The addition of a comfort station was also mentioned as a possible addition pending NYCDPR’s determination for a need for such a facility in this area.

Alternative BR-5

With Alternative BR-5, the renovated Sergeant William Dougherty Playground will become longer and narrower than the existing park. The park will maintain both passive and active recreation. Although some of the existing mature London Plane trees will be taken along Cherry Street, additional shade trees will be planted in the park and along the street edges to provide a buffer between park users and the adjacent streets.



Though arranged differently than the previous scheme, components of this configuration of the reconstructed park may include: basketball courts, handball courts, a dog run, play equipment, a water play area and various seating areas. Similarly, the potential addition of a comfort station was also mentioned pending NYCDPR’s determination of the need for such a facility in this area.

Programmatic components of the active portion of the park will include play equipment, possibly provided for a specific age group (i.e.: toddlers) and landscaped seating areas. The perimeter of the park will be fenced, gated and access will be controlled by NYCDPR personnel.

Meeker Avenue Triangle Plaza (Brooklyn)

The realignment of the Brooklyn Connector in Brooklyn and the acquisition of certain parcels of land on the west side of the BQE will provide new areas for park construction. The specific area configuration and programmatic elements will vary by alternative as discussed below.

All Alternatives

All build alternatives will create a planted triangular island plaza on the west side of the Brooklyn Connector at the intersection of Meeker Avenue and Van Dam Street. This newly created triangular island will, in general, be constructed over the existing triangular area that is currently painted asphalt. The triangle will be curbed and planted with groundcover and shade trees. The triangle will be fenced to direct pedestrians toward defined access points at crosswalk locations. A central paved area will provide seating for park users. All the materials used will comply with standard NYCDOT-approved materials including concrete pavements, granite block tree pits and NYCDOT-approved lighting.

Alternative BR-5

Under this alternative, a new, second rectangular-shaped park will be created parallel to and north of the westbound Apollo Street exit ramp In addition to the Meeker Avenue triangle park. The park would be planned as an active recreation area and would provide a skateboard/in-line skate facility. The perimeter of the park will be fenced, gated and access will be controlled by NYCDPR personnel.

Queens Parks

While there are no existing parks in the immediate vicinity of the project in Queens, several opportunities for the creation of new parks were investigated. In each of the Build Alternatives, properties in the two easternmost blocks of the project are proposed for conversion into parkland.

All Alternatives Except BR-5

With build alternatives RA-5, RA-6, BR-2 and BR-3, two blocks of parkland will be created underneath the Queens Approach between Laurel Hill Boulevard, 54th Avenue, 43rd Street and 54th Drive. Most of the new park land in both these blocks would be located under the BQE and would therefore not be appropriate for passive recreation which benefits from quieter environments and the presence of plantings which could not grow under the BQE viaduct where little to no direct sunlight and rain would reach. Therefore, these two blocks are proposed for active recreational uses.



The southern block will contain basketball courts and seating areas similar in nature to those being provided in the reconstructed Sergeant William Dougherty Playground. Landscaping will be provided in all areas that are not shaded by the structure. The northern block will contain a skateboard/in-line skate park similar in nature to that described above, seating areas and a dog run. Landscaping will be provided in all areas that are not shaded by the structure. The park is for all alternatives except BR-5 illustrated in Figure 3-15.

As both of these two new blocks of recreational space will be under the maintenance jurisdiction of DPR, all materials used within the park will conform to NYCDPR design standards. The perimeters of both these new park facilities will be fenced, gated and access will be controlled by NYCDPR personnel.

Alternative BR-5

Similar to the areas described above but in a slightly different configuration, build alternative BR-5 will create approximately two blocks of parkland underneath the Queens Approach between Laurel Hill Boulevard, 54th Avenue, 43rd Street and 54th Drive. The southern block will contain basketball courts, seating areas and a dog run. The northern block will contain a skateboard/in-line skate park similar in nature to that described above and seating areas. Landscaping will be provided in all areas that are not shaded by the structure.

As both of these two new blocks of recreational space will be under the maintenance jurisdiction of DPR, all materials used within the park will conform to NYCDPR design standards. NYCDPR personnel will control the perimeters of both these new park facilities and they will be fenced, gated and access controlled.

Newtown Creek Shoreline Treatment (Brooklyn and Queens)

The Newtown Creek area directly below the bridge also offers open space opportunities currently inaccessible to the community. The banks on both sides of the Newtown Creek underneath the Main Span are possible locations for a launch for small recreational boats as is the area along the riverbank located at the end of Meeker and Gardner Avenues in Brooklyn. Other potential boat launch sites that could be explore further include the historic Penny Bridge and at the Newtown Barge Terminal Playground. The areas along Newtown Creek beneath the main span in both boroughs will be stabilized with rip-rap and will also be planted with native species to prevent erosion, reestablish existing habitat or create new habitat.

Kosciuszko Bridge Project IV-1 February 2007

Chapter IV Visual Impact Assessment

A. INTRODUCTION

This chapter introduces builds upon the visual environment characterized discussed in Section II.E. by the selection of ten key viewpoints within each of the five visual districts. A description of the existing views and the character of the views provides is compared with the potential impacts from the all project alternatives.

B. IMPACTS TO VIEWER GROUPS

The potential for impact of the project on a viewer group is dependent upon the structure alignment (location, height, width and proximity of the structure to existing facilities); the materials and construction type proposed for the structure; and the urban design and streetscape, park reconstruction and new park betterments included with the project. A brief overview of the areas considered in determining the visual impacts associated with each of the three aforementioned categories is described below.

Alignment

The alignment of each alternative was analyzed to determine their respective visual impact on the viewer groups identified in both the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. The analysis was based on the following considerations:

Widening of the Brooklyn Connector from six to seven lanes, with the additional lane located above Meeker Avenue would constitute a negative visual impact;

Adding auxiliary lanes on the approaches and main span that results in a widening of the structure from six to nine lanes would constitute a negative visual impact;

Moving the main line structure and ramps closer to a business or residence would constitute a negative visual impact;

Constructing a new bridge parallel to the existing bridge of dissimilar materials and profile, would constitute a negative impact;

Replacing deteriorated elements with new or rehabilitated facilities would constitute a positive impact.

For the rehabilitation alternatives, the structure widening would have a negative impact on at-grade motorists, pedestrians, retail, industrial and warehouse workers. However, the rehabilitation and construction of new facilities would be a positive impact on the BQE motorists.



The proximity of the structure to existing residences would either result in a positive or negative impact, depending on where the widening occurs.

Similarly, for the replacement alternatives, the structure widening would have a negative impact on at-grade motorists, retail, industrial and warehouse workers. However, the new facilities of similar material and profile would have a positive impact on BQE motorists, pedestrians, bicyclist and boaters. The proximity of the structure to existing residences would either result in a positive or negative impact, depending on where the widening occurs.

Structure Materials and Structure Type

The structure materials and structure type for the approaches and main span has not been finalized during the DEIS process and, in all likelihood, would not be finalized until final design. For purpose of evaluating the visual impact of those structures, we have assumed that a “Signature Bridge” would be a designed that enhances the context of the area. Therefore, we have assumed that materials and structure type of a new bridge would constitute a positive visual impact on all viewer groups.

Urban Design Streetscape and Parks

Each build alternative includes a group of elements, treatments and facilities that positively affect the visual quality of that alternative. Those elements as described in Section III. D typically includes urban design and streetscape amenities new park facilities and parkland Brooklyn and Queens.

Table 4-1 summarizes the visual impact of build each alternative on viewer groups in the Boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens.



TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE VISUAL IMPACTS ON GROUPS

Summary of Overall Visual Impacts by Viewer Group, Alternative and Borough

Motorists Pedestrians Bicyclists Boaters Residents

Retail,Industrial & Warehouse

Workers

Alternative At-Grade

On the BQE

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

RA-5Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

RA-6Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

BR-2Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

BR-3Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Positive Brooklyn

Negative Brooklyn

BR-5Negative Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Positive Queens

Negative Queens

Negative Queens

C. VISUAL IMPACTS AT KEY VIEWPOINTS

This section provides a discussion of potential impacts upon the ten selected viewpoints and their viewsheds within the visual districts. It is noted that that following discussion does not include a discussion of the No Build Alternative since routine maintenance, repair and replacement of infrastructure elements such as pavement, barriers, lighting would be conducted on an as-needed basis only. As a result, this alternative would have little or no visual impact upon viewpoints and their viewsheds.



Viewpoint 1 (Bridge Visual District)

The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 1 include westbound BQE motorists crossing the bridge who currently have views of the roadway and bridge as well as distant views of the Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens skylines.

Rehabilitation Alternatives (RA-5, RA-6)

Under the rehabilitation alternatives, deteriorated pavements, lighting, signing, and barriers would be replaced on the existing parallel bridge resulting in an overall improvement and positive impacts to the viewshed. Under both Rehabilitation Alternatives, a new, lower profile parallel bridge would be built adjacent to the existing bridge, resulting in further improvements to the viewshed. A motorist’s typical view from Viewpoint 1 for rehabilitation alternatives is shown in Figure 4-1.

FIGURE 4-1: VIEWPOINT 1 FROM EXISTING BRIDGE (NEW PARALLEL BRIDGE WITH BIKEWAY/WALKWAY ON RIGHT SIDE - NOT SHOWN)

Replacement Alternatives (BR-2, BR-3 & BR-5)

Under the bridge replacement alternatives, the existing bridge would be removed; as a result, the existing viewpoint would be shifted slightly to the west and at a lower elevation. Replacement of the deteriorated main span, pavements, lighting, signing, barriers etc with new infrastructure would result in an overall improvement to the viewshed, all of which are considered to be positive impacts. Therefore, the visual impact on Viewpoint 2 is considered a



positive impact. A motorist’s typical view from Viewpoint 1 under the bridge replacement alternatives are illustrated in Figure 4-2.

FIGURE 4-2: VIEWPOINT 1 FROM NEW WESTBOUND BRIDGE (BIKEWAY/WALKWAY ON THE RIGHT SIDE)


The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 2 include bicyclists and pedestrians who would have views of Old Cavalry Cemetery and distant views of the Manhattan and Brooklyn skylines. This viewpoint is currently available to motorists only but would be available to bicyclists and pedestrians under Bridge Replacement Alternatives.


This viewpoint would continue to be available to motorists but not new user groups including bicyclists and pedestrians. Under Alternative RA-6, the view from a new parallel bridge would be shifted slightly to the west and at a lower elevation. A typical view from Viewpoint 1 under the bridge replacement alternatives is illustrated in Figure 4-3.



FIGURE 4-3: VIEWPOINT 2 FROM BIKEWAY/WALKWAY


Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5 include the construction of a new bikeway/walkway on the western side of the new parallel bridge that carries traffic westbound across Newtown Creek into Brooklyn. Under the bridge replacement alternatives, the existing bridge would be removed; as a result, the existing viewpoint would be shifted slightly to the west. The new bikeway/walkway would create opportunities for views that are not available to bicylists and pedestrians. Panoramic views of both the Brooklyn and Manhattan skylines will be provided in Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5. Replacement of the deteriorated main span, pavements, lighting, signing, barriers etc with new infrastructure would result in an overall improvement to the viewshed. Therefore, the visual impact on Viewpoints 2 is considered a positive impact. A typical view from Viewpoint 2 under the bridge replacement alternatives is shown above in Figure 4-3.


The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 3 include BQE motorists crossing the bridge who currently have views of the roadway and bridge, Brooklyn and Queens skylines, and distant views of the Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens skylines.


Under the rehabilitation alternatives, deteriorated pavements, lighting, signing, and barriers would be replaced on the existing parallel bridge resulting in an overall improvement and positive impacts to the viewshed. Under both Rehabilitation Alternatives, a new, lower profile



parallel bridge would be built adjacent to the existing bridge, resulting in further improvements to the viewshed. A motorist’s typical view from Viewpoint 3 for rehabilitation alternatives is shown in Figure 4-4.

Eastbound BQE motorists views to the southeast toward Queens from the existing bridge may be visually impacted by the addition of a new, adjacent parallel bridge on the east side of the existing bridge, the rehabilitation of the main span through truss and the replacement of the pavement, barriers, lighting and other amenities. The new approaches and main span of the new parallel bridge would be constructed at a lower elevation than the existing main span. However, the visual impact may be mitigated by the final design and use of materials of the new parallel bridge.

FIGURE 4-4: VIEWPOINT 3 FROM REHABILITATED EXISTING BRIDGE (NEW PARALLEL BRIDGES NOT SHOWN)


Under the bridge replacement alternatives, the existing bridge would be removed; as a result, the existing viewpoint would be shifted slightly to the east and at a lower elevation. Replacement of the deteriorated main span, pavements, lighting, signing, barriers etc with new infrastructure would result in an overall improvement to the viewshed, all of which are considered to be positive impacts. Therefore, the visual impact on Viewpoint 3 is considered a positive impact. A motorist’s typical view from Viewpoint 3 under the bridge replacement alternatives are illustrated in Figure 4-5.



FIGURE 4-5: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 3 WITH REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE


The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 4 include bicyclists and pedestrians who would have views of the Brooklyn and Queens skylines. This viewpoint is currently available to motorists only but would be available to bicyclists and pedestrians under Bridge Replacement Alternatives.


Alternative RA-5 includes a bikeway/walkway on the eastern side of the new parallel bridge across Newtown Creek, thereby creating opportunities for views that do not currently exist. Panoramic views of Brooklyn and Queens to the east will be provided in Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5. Replacement of the deteriorated main span, pavements, lighting, signing, barriers etc with new infrastructure would result in an overall improvement to the viewshed. Therefore, the visual impact on Viewpoint 4 is considered a positive impact. A typical bicyclist or pedestrian’s view traveling towards Brooklyn is provided in Figure 4-6. Under Alternative RA-5, views from the bikeway/walkway looking west toward the Manhattan skyline would be obstructed by the underdeck truss of the existing bridge.

Alternative RA-6 provides no amenities for bicylclists or pedestrians.



FIGURE 4-6: REPRESENTATIVE VIEWPOINT 4 FROM EXISTING BRIDGE


Alternatives BR-2, BR-3 and BR-5 include the construction of a new bikeway/walkway on the western side of the new parallel bridge that carries traffic westbound across Newtown Creek into Brooklyn. As a result, this viewpoint would not be available under the bridge replacement alternatives.

Viewpoints 5 and 6 (Calvary Cemetery Visual District)

The affected viewer groups at Viewpoints 5 and 6 on Laurel Hill Boulevard include at-grade Queens motorists, at-grade pedestrians, and workers from within the cemetery. Views include a side (elevation) view of the Main Span truss and approaches.


Under the rehabilitation alternatives, a new parallel bridge with new, additional supporting columns would be built at a lower elevation on either the eastern side of the existing bridge (RA-5) or the western side of the existing bridge (RA-6). Under RA-6, the viewshed would be impacted with construction of the new bridge closer to the cemetery and above Laurel Hill Boulevard.

Viewer groups at Viewpoint 5 may experience some visual clutter, especially with greater proximity to the bridge. The distant views of the bridge from Viewpoint 5 would mitigate the minor impacts to the overall viewshed. Viewpoint 5 for the rehabilitation alternatives are illustrated in Figure 4-7.



FIGURE 4-7: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 5 WITH REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVES

Due to its adjacency to the proposed new parallel bridge under Alternative RA-5, viewer groups would see dissimilar materials resulting in potential negative impacts. Details of final bridge design (for both new parallel bridge and rehabilitation of existing bridge) would play a large role in final determination of impacts. Mitigation measures could include design and constructing the parallel bridge similar in design, materials and colors of the existing bridge. Viewpoint 6 is illustrated in Figure 4-8.

FIGURE 4-8: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 6 WITH REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE RA-6, BR-2, AND BR-3.




For all replacement alternatives, the views from both Viewpoints 5 and 6 would change. While the new bridges are subject to final design phase revisions, it is anticipated that demolition of the existing structure and the construction of the new bridges at the same elevation would include fewer columns and a thinner and lower profile, resulting in a reduction in visual clutter, generally considered to be an overall improvement to a viewshed of Viewpoint 5. A simulated view from Viewpoint 5 for the replacement alternatives is illustrated in Figure 4-9.

FIGURE 4-9: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 5 OF BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE

Alternatives BR-2 and BR-3, would bring the new bridge further west and closer to Viewpoint 6. Both alternatives would result in a new approach with supporting columns closer to the cemetery above Laurel Hill Boulevard resulting negative impacts to the viewshed from Viewpoint 6. While the park and streetscape improvements would have postiive benefits for the viewshed at Veiwpoint 6, they would not completely ameliorate the impact of constructing a new structure closer to the cemetary and above Laurel Hill Boulevard. (A rendering of BR-2 and BR-3 impacts upon Viewpoint 6 is shown earlier in Figure 4-8.)

Alternative BR-5 would maintain approximately the same distance from the cemetery but its lower profile would result in negative impacts. The at-grade park and streetscape ammenities would, however, provide postitive benefits. An illustration of Viewpoint 6 for Alternative BR-5 is shown in Figure 4-10.



FIGURE 4-10: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 6 (LAUREL HILL BOULEVARD) FOR ALTERNATIVES RA-5 AND BR-5

Viewpoint 7 (Newtown Creek Industrial Area Visual District)

The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 7 include at-grade Queens motorists, workers and pedestrians who have both overhead and side (elevation) views of the bridge. Views include the Main Span, the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches and their supporting columns.


Due to its adjacency to the proposed new parallel bridge under Alternative RA-5, viewer groups would see dissimilar materials resulting in potential negative impacts. Views could be congested and have the potential to be dominated by very large structural elements from the existing and proposed structures.

Details of final bridge design (for both new parallel bridge and rehabilitation of existing bridge) would play a large role in final determination of impacts. Mitigation measures could include design and constructing the parallel bridge similar in design, materials and colors of the existing bridge. Viewpoint 7 is illustrated in Figure 4-11.

Overall, alternatives RA-5 and RA-6 would constitute a negative visual impact at Viewpoint 7 illustrated in Figure 4-10.



FIGURE 4-11: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 7 WITH REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE


All Bridge Replacement Alternatives propose new structures of similar materials and amenities. The roadway section will be wider and the entire structure will be built at a lower elevation. However, the Bridge Replacement structure would also be more slender, constructed of new materials and lower in elevation. Though more slender than the existing bridge, the new, wider structure would dominate a much larger portion of the overhead space because it is closer to the viewer, thus making the area under the structure feel less open to the sky and more confined from the buildings beneath and adjacent to the structure.

However, the removal of the main span through truss and approach underdeck trusses and replacing the trusses with a proposed structure would be an improvement to a viewshed.

Overall, all replacement alternatives would constitute a positive visual impact at Viewpoint 7. A view from Viewpoint 7 for the replacement alternatives is illustrated in Figure 4-12.



FIGURE 4-12: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 7 WITH REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVES

Viewpoint 8 (Newtown Creek Waterway District)

The affected viewer groups at Viewpoint 8 include boaters and paddlers who have distant but side (elevation) views of the bridge. Views include the Main Span, the Brooklyn and Queens Approaches and the supporting columns.


Under rehabilitation alternatives, the viewers on Newtown Creek would be impacted by the new, lower parallel bridge’s columns, the discontinuity in the profile elevations between the existing and new bridge, the dissimilar materials and design, and the loss of overhead space (lowered elevation of new parallel bridge) from the new lower bridge. A view from Viewpoint seven for the rehabilitation alternatives are illustrated in Figure 4-13.

It is anticipated that the differing profiles of the existing and proposed parallel structure result in a distinctive conflict of visual discontinuity. All the Rehabilitation Alternatives will negatively impact the existing views within the Newtown Creek Waterway Visual District. The contrast of design styles and materials will be in conflict as well.

As discussed earlier, all of these elements (except of loss of overhead space) may be mitigated during the final design phase depending upon the design and use of materials and colors.



FIGURE 4-13: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 8 WITH REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE


The Bridge Replacement Alternatives will positively impact the district by removing the existing bridge and truss and replacing it with a wider, lower profile structure spanning Newtown Creek. While this brings the structure closer to the water, the new structure will exhibit a new and improved design quality, new materials and lighting with one continuous profile.

Overall, all replacement alternatives would constitute a positive visual impact at Viewpoint 8. A view from Viewpoint seven for the replacement alternatives is illustrated in Figure 4-14.



FIGURE 4-14: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 8 WITHREPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVES

Viewpoints 9, 10, 11 and 12 (Residential and Commercial District)

The affected viewer groups are comprised of residents, at-grade Brooklyn motorists, pedestrians, and workers who have views of the Main Span, Brooklyn Connector, and distant views of the Brooklyn Approach.


Under all alternatives the existing Brooklyn Connector will be reconstructed in-kind with new materials and the architectural treatments included will be an improvement in comparison to the existing deteriorated condition. However, widening the Brooklyn Connector above Meeker Avenue between Morgan Avenue and Vandervoort Avenue and widening the eastbound access ramp is considered a negative impact for at-grade motorists and pedestrians traveling eastbound on Meeker Avenue.

The alignment of the structure, its relation to the residences and the widening proposed are the main factors in assessing the overall impact to the viewsheds of the viewpoints.

The reconstruction of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground on the east side of the Connector as well as other parks and at-grade streetscape amenities on the west side of the Connector will further improve this area by enhancing the open space and providing more areas for activity to the local users. The overall visual impact as a result of these improvements would be considered positive.

At Viewpoint 9, reconstruction of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground and creation of new park areas provide visual relief form the dominant hardscape elements of the area. As a result,



the rehabilitation alternatives would be a positive impact upon existing visual resources. An illustration of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground at Viewpoint 9 for all alternatives is presented in Figure 4-15.

FIGURE 4-15: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 9 OF SERGEANT WILLIAM DOUGHERTY PLAYGROUND FOR ALTERNATIVES EXCEPT BR-5.

At Viewpoint 10, the construction of new parks and at-grade streetscape amenities constitute a positive visual impact. An illustration of Viewpoint 10, or the Meeker Triangle, is illustrated in Figure 4-16.



FIGURE 4-16: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 10 OF MEEKER AVENUE TRIANGLE FOR ALL ALTERNATIVES EXCEPT BR-5.

At Viewpoint 11, the widening of the Brooklyn Connector and widening of the eastbound access ramp above Meeker Avenue between Morgan Avenue and Vandervoort Avenue is considered a negative impact for at-grade motorists and pedestrians traveling eastbound on Meeker Avenue. Viewpoint 11 is illustrated in Figure 4-17.

FIGURE 4-17: VIEWPOINT 11 FOR ALL ALTERNATIVES EXCEPT BR-5.



At Viewpoint 12, the reconstruction of the Brooklyn Connector with new in-kind materials and architectural treatments along with at-grade streetscape amenities constitutes a positive visual impact (shown in Figure 4-18).

FIGURE 4-18: VIEWPOINT 12 FOR ALL ALTERNATIVES

Overall, all rehabilitation alternatives are considered to have a positive impact on viewpoints 9, 10, and 11 and a negative impact on Viewpoint 12.


At Viewpoint 9, the reconstruction of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground and creation of new park space would have a similar view as shown in Figure 3-26 and would constitute a positive impact.

At Viewpoint 10, the creation of new parks for would constitute a positive improvement. Alternative BR-5 would further enhance the improvement with the relocation of the Brooklyn Connector and expressway further west, away form the existing residences along Meeker Avenue and Van Dam Streets. An illustration of Viewpoint 10 under Alternative BR-5 is illustrated in Figure 4-19.



FIGURE 4-19: REPRESENTATIVE VIEW FROM VIEWPOINT 10 OF MEEKER AVENUE TRIANGLE FOR REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVE BR-5

At Viewpoint 11, the widening of the Brooklyn Connector above Meeker Avenue between Morgan Avenue and Vandervoort Avenue is considered a negative impact. Additional negative visual impacts would result under Alternative BR-5 due to the relocation of the Brooklyn Connector to the south, moving the structure closer to existing buildings. The shift would result in a negative visual impact.

At Viewpoint 12, reconstruction of the Brooklyn Connector with new in-kind materials and architectural treatments along with at-grade streetscape amenities constitutes a positive visual impact at Viewpoint 12 (shown in Figure 4-18).

Overall, the replacement alternatives are considered to have a positive impact at Viewpoints 9, 10, and 11and a negative impact on Viewpoint 11.

In addition to impacts to the key viewpoints discussed above, a summary of impacts from major design elements within each of the build alternatives to each Viewpoint was also analyzed. Table 4-2 presents the major design features derived from the discussion of design features in Chapter III that have the greatest potential for impacts upon the key viewpoints. The eleven major features that have the greatest potential for impact to viewpoints and viewer groups are shown in Table 4-2.



TABLE 4-2: MAJOR DESIGN FEATURES

Feature No. Feature Description Alternative

A Removal of main span through truss, underdeck truss and replacement with a lower (elevation), new well designed structure at a lower elevation.

BR-2, BR-2, BR-3

B New structural adjacent to existing approaches and main span (assumes (dissimilar motorists and profile) RA-5, RA-6

C-1 Widening and/or realignment of structure closer to existing buildings, residences, and viewpoints. All

C-2 Widening and/or alignment shifted away from existing buildings, residences, and viewpoints. BR-5

C-3 Widening and/or realignment of structure to be closer to existing playground All

D In-kind Reconstruction of the Brooklyn Connector w/Architectural Treatment All

E Reconstruction of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground All

F Construction of a widened structure above Laurel Hill Boulevard in Queens RA-6, BR-3

G Reconstruction of pavement, signing, barriers, lighting and overall infrastructure on approaches and main span All

H Widening of the Brooklyn Connector above Meeker Avenue between Morgan Avenue and Vandervoort Avenue and widening the eastbound access ramp

RA-5, BR-2, BR-3, BR-5

I Construction of at-grade parks (Brooklyn and Queens) and streetscape amenities All

Table 4-3 rates the major design elements (shown as letters from Table 4-2) as either positive or negative impacts to each key Viewpoint. The more dominant design elements are also noted.

Visu

al R

esou

rce

Ass

essm

ent

Proj

ect E

lem

ents

Kos

cius

zko

Brid

ge P

roje

ct

IV-2

2Fe

brua

ry 2

007

TAB

LE 4

-3: S

UM

MA

RY

OF

IMPA

CTS

BY

VIEW

POIN

T A

ND

ALT

ERN

ATI

VE.

Vi

ewpo

int

1 2

34

56

7 8

910

1112

P

roje

ct E

lem

ents

C

onsi

dere

d

Pos

itive

Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

- I

- D

, I

D,E

,I D

D

, I

D, I

Neg

ativ

e E

lem

ents

-

- -

- B

* B

* B

*, C

-1

B,C

-1

B,C

-3,H

-

C-1

,H

-

Dom

inan

t Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

B

B

B, C

-1

D

B,E

,H

D

C-1

,H, I

I

RA-5A-5

Ove

rall

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Mix

ed*

Mix

ed*

Mix

ed*

Posi

tive

Post

iive

Posi

tive

Neg

ativ

e Po

sitiv

e

Pos

itive

Ele

men

ts

G

GG

G-

IC

-2

D,I

D,E

,ID

,ID

, ID

, I

Neg

ativ

e E

lem

ents

-

- -

- B

* B

*, F

B

* B

,C-2

B

,C-3

,H

B,C

-1

- -

Dom

inan

t Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

B

F,I

B*,

C-2

D

E

,H,I

D,I,

C-1

D

, I

I

RA-6

Ove

rall

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Mix

ed*

Neg

ativ

e M

ixed

* Po

sitiv

e Po

stiiv

e N

egat

ive

Neg

ativ

e Po

sitiv

e

Pos

itive

Ele

men

ts

G

GG

GA

A,I

A

D,I

D,E

,ID

,ID

, ID

, I

Neg

ativ

e E

lem

ents

-

- -

- C

-1

F C

-1

C-1

B

,C-3

,H

C-1

C

-1,H

-

Dom

inan

t Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

A

A,I

A

D

E,H

,I D

,I C

-1,D

,I I

BR-2

Ove

rall

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Post

iive

Mix

ed*

Neg

ativ

e Po

sitiv

e

Pos

itive

Ele

men

ts

G

GG

GA

A,I

A

D, I

D,E

,ID

,ID

, ID

, I

Neg

ativ

e E

lem

ents

-

- -

- C

-1

F C

-1

C-1

B

,C-3

,H

C-1

C

-1,H

-

Dom

inan

t Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

A

A,I

A

I E

,H,I

D,I

C-1

,D,I

I

BR-3

Ove

rall

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Post

iive

Posi

tive

Neg

ativ

e Po

sitiv

e

Pos

itive

Ele

men

ts

G

GG

GA

A,I

A

D, I

D,E

,ID

,ID

, ID

, I

Neg

ativ

e E

lem

ents

-

- -

- -

- C

-1

C-1

B

,C-3

,H

C-2

C

-1,H

-

Dom

inan

t Ele

men

ts

G

G

G

G

A

A,I

A

I E

,H,I

C-2

,D

C-1

,D,I

I

BR-5

Ove

rall

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Posi

tive

Post

iive

Posi

tive

Neg

ativ

e Po

sitiv

e

*Bot

h po

sitiv

e an

d ne

gativ

e im

pact

s ar

e do

min

ant;

final

des

ign

and

treat

men

t of m

ater

ials

and

col

orat

ion

wou

ld m

itiga

te n

egat

ive

impa

cts.

*

Kosciuszko Bridge Project V-1 February 2007

Chapter V Mitigation

A. INTRODUCTION

Each of the Build Alternatives described in Chapter III include elements such as design features, streetscape and landscape improvements and parks and recreation facilities to avoid and minimize visual impacts to the visual districts, key viewpoints, and user groups. Elements include: a well-designed alignment configuration, the careful choice and detailing of the materials for of the Brooklyn Connector approaches and Main Span; the creation of a bikeway/walkway; creation of Meeker Avenue Triangle, the expansion and beautification of Sergeant William Dougherty Playground; creation of new parks in Queens; and the provision of streetscape amenities throughout the entire project.

In general, most of the potential visual impacts that could have occurred in this context have been mostly reduced or eliminated with the inclusion of the additional treatments and features described above. Any general negative visual impacts to the overall context of the area have been mitigated however, through attention to good design and contextual detail for all elements included throughout the entire project area.

However, as described in Chapter IV, of each of the build alternatives results in positive and negative impacts to the visual districts, key viewpoints and user groups. As described in Chapter IV, negative visual impacts are anticipated to occur from design features shown in Table 1 including: widening of the Brooklyn Connector from six lanes to seven lanes; widening of the eastbound Brooklyn access ramp and from the provision of auxiliary lanes; widening of both the approaches and main span from six to nine lanes; relocation of alignment of expressway closer to existing structures in the area

FHWA’s Guidelines for Visual Resource Assessments requires the identification of mitigation measures of negative impacts to viewsheds and viewer groups as identified in the previous Chapter IV. Mitigation measures will be necessary to address any impact that is still determined to occur once one has analyzed the proposed view with the finishes and treatments developed as part of and included in the proposed future build condition are included in the evaluation.

B. MITIGATION

Mitigation measures presented in this section are limited to measures that would still allow each of the Build Alternatives to meet the project’s purpose and need of improving traffic and safety operations within the project limits and study area. For example, mitigations that could reduce a negative visual impact resulting from widening the expressway is not considered a viable option because it would not meet the project’s purpose and need.

Visual Resource Assessment Mitigation

Kosciuszko Bridge Project V-2 February 2007

Rehabilitation Alternatives (RA-5 and RA-6) These alternatives include using the existing main span to carry Queens-bound traffic and building a new main span at a lower profile elevation either on the eastbound side (RA-5) or the westbound side (RA-6). The lower profile elevations are possible because the minimum allowable underbridge clearance above the Newtown Creek has been reduced. A roadway with a lower profile has an approach roadway with a flatter grade, shorter pier columns and is typically less expensive to construct.

As viewed by boaters and pedestrians on and along the Newtown Creek and motorists at-grade, the dissimilar elevation profiles of the existing and new spans creates a greater mass up in the air as viewed against the sky plain. As viewed by motorists on the BQE, pedestrians and bicyclists on the new, lower span, the presence of the existing span immediately adjacent to them will eliminate any views from the roadway towards the Newtown Creek to the east.

Methods to mitigate this visual impact include:

Raising the new span’s profile to match the existing span’s line;

Matching the new span’s materials and coloration as closely as possible to the existing span’s elements so that the two structures appear as one on the horizon and not attract unnecessary visual attention or disjointed

Utilizing an open bridge railing system so that any opportunities for intermittent views are still possible.

Bridge Replacement Alternative (BR-3)

This alternative includes building a new Queens Approach roadway in a location substantially closer to the Old Calvary Cemetery. The structure of the approach roadway, built above Laurel Hill Boulevard, will create an uncomfortable spatial environment for pedestrians and motorists by obscuring their view of the sky above.

To mitigate this impact, a bridge system-type that is both lighter and thinner in profile while at the same time having fewer pier columns or points where the bridge system touches the ground could be utilized. Examples of such bridge system-types include long span tie back/bowstring arches or cable stayed/suspension-type spans. Such a system would open up the space under the connector roadway thus reducing the closed-in appearance.

Kosciuszko Bridge Project A-1 February 16, 2007

Appendix A GLOSSARY OF TERMS Deteriorated (when pertaining to roadway): Characterizes roadway elements that are not fully functional and do not present continuity of line or consistency of texture.

Roadway Edge: Elements that delineate the borders of the roadway, providing directionality and continuity of form.

View Corridor: Boundaries that limit the surface area visible from an observer’s viewpoint. (In Brooklyn, the pattern of the street system creates regular view corridors at each cross street to the Bridge.

Viewer Exposure: The physical location of each viewer group, the number of people in that group, and duration of that view.

Viewer Groups: Viewers who share similar viewing perspectives, and sensitivity to changes in the roadway. Six viewer groups were identified for this assessment: Residents; Office Workers; Industrial, Manufacturing, Retail, Warehouse, and Transportation Workers; Motorists; Pedestrian; and Bicyclists.

Viewer Response: Measures of viewer response to changes in visual resources include viewer exposure, viewer sensitivity, cultural significance and local values.

Viewer Sensitivity: The viewers’ variable receptivity to the elements within the environment that they are viewing, affected by viewer activity, preconceptions and awareness; a person cannot readily notice every object with all its attributes that compose the total visual environment.

Viewers: The people who are likely to see a project; a basic distinction among viewer groups is between roadway users (view from the road) and neighbors (view of the road).

Visual Character: The visual character of a landscape is formed by the order of the patterns composing it. The visual elements of these patterns are the form, line, color and texture of the landscape’s components; their interrelationships can be described in terms of dominance, scale diversity, and continuity.

Visual Cues: Elements, which connect and delineate areas of use within the traffic and pedestrian control system.

Visual District: An area bordering the corridor that is physically homogenous and visually limited in appearance, such as low scale residential homes, large-scale office towers, or open space and rural pastures.

Visual Impact: The degree of change in visual resources and viewer response to those resources caused by a development project.

Visual Resource Assessment Appendix A - Glossary of Terms

Kosciuszko Bridge Project A-2 February 2007

Visual Quality: An evaluative appraisal of the relative excellence of a view or of a sequence of views; individual judgments of quality are affected by the values and activity of the viewer.

Visual Relief (when pertaining to roadway): Elements, such as planting, vertical definition or roadway appurtenances that break up the monotony of hard, paved surfaces and can be used to establish patterns in line, texture and color.

Visual Resources: The appearance of the features that make up the visible landscape.

Date post:	20-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

VISUAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT...Figure 2-14: View Looking West at Old Calvary Cemetery and Distant View...

Documents