(To be asked of Professors Richard Plunz, Architecture and Patricia Culligan, Civil Engineering, of Columbia and authors of Eco Gowanus: Urban Remediation by Design).
1. How have designs for Public Place compared with your own ideas and findings for the needs of the area?
2. Who or what stands essentially in the way of implementing your recommendations? Political will? Money?
3. Discuss briefly your research methods? Did you examine tax records, old titles, designs?
4. What are some of the immediate risks of living above and amidst this particular site?
5. Where else in the U.S. have your ideas of green industrial infrastructure been implemented?
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environment. Show all posts
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Giambusso Budget Line
WHO'S PAYING ATTENTION? (Giambusso): In the rush to build new housing, stores, and community spaces are politicians and developers ignoring important safety precautions? Environmentalists, safety experts and advocacy groups have called for caution in the rush to build, but their voices are often drowned out by business friendly city agencies and political leaders eager to point to construction as a sign of progress. Only six years after 9/11 what lessons have we learned about building safety and environmental impact? Are those lessons being heeded by our political leaders? Through an examination of specific sites targeted for development, the piece will examine the political battles and interplay between pressure groups that brought these sites to bear.
Air Quality
Post 9/11 Air Quality regulations (Mike Weiss)
Who is responsible for monitoring and alerting, and has this improved after 9/11?
The 9/11 air quality issue at the time of the attack arose because (1) building materials (primarily asbestos) had been used in the Towers’ construction and (2) right after the attack there was confusion between government agencies as to who was responsible for monitoring and alerting people about air quality hazards.
1. So far, there doesn’t seem to have been any news about improving building materials standards (which materials are safer during a disater, as well as during demolition and construction). The use of asbestos was outlawed just after the construction of the Twin Towers, and there doesn’t seem to have been any other toxic contaminants that were found during 9/11 which then led to use restrictions. Instead, this aspect of the story has shifted to the cleaning of the asbestos-laden residue from 9/11 which still covers buildings downtown.
2. Right after 9/11, many observers feel that the Federal EPA and OSHA should have stepped forward and centralized efforts to immediately issue accurate air quality alerts, and to then coordinate all government agencies’ activities during the clean up. Further, once in this position a centralized authorithy would have been able to oversee the construction boom that is happening in Lower Manhattan (35 new buildings since 9/11, 68 currently in the works) in order to monitor and alert people about air conditions.
This didn’t happen. For various reasons, seemingly stemming from Mayor Giuliani’s insistance that City government and the City agency DDC (Dept. of Design and Construction) oversee all 9/11 building issues, there is now no central authority accountable for air quality issues. Instead, there is a mix of City, State, and Federal agencies which are performing various regulatory roles they were used to performing from before 9/11, but in the post-9/11 world it is unclear what their formal responsibilities are, what they are responsible to report and who they need to report to.
To sum up, the issue of air quality standards and how they may have been improved after 9/11 seems to focus on alerting procedures. This means how have procedures improved which will alert people better next time in the event of an emergency, and also who is monitoring and alerting people about the current air quality relating to the post-9/11 demolition and construction boom.
Who is responsible for monitoring and alerting, and has this improved after 9/11?
The 9/11 air quality issue at the time of the attack arose because (1) building materials (primarily asbestos) had been used in the Towers’ construction and (2) right after the attack there was confusion between government agencies as to who was responsible for monitoring and alerting people about air quality hazards.
1. So far, there doesn’t seem to have been any news about improving building materials standards (which materials are safer during a disater, as well as during demolition and construction). The use of asbestos was outlawed just after the construction of the Twin Towers, and there doesn’t seem to have been any other toxic contaminants that were found during 9/11 which then led to use restrictions. Instead, this aspect of the story has shifted to the cleaning of the asbestos-laden residue from 9/11 which still covers buildings downtown.
2. Right after 9/11, many observers feel that the Federal EPA and OSHA should have stepped forward and centralized efforts to immediately issue accurate air quality alerts, and to then coordinate all government agencies’ activities during the clean up. Further, once in this position a centralized authorithy would have been able to oversee the construction boom that is happening in Lower Manhattan (35 new buildings since 9/11, 68 currently in the works) in order to monitor and alert people about air conditions.
This didn’t happen. For various reasons, seemingly stemming from Mayor Giuliani’s insistance that City government and the City agency DDC (Dept. of Design and Construction) oversee all 9/11 building issues, there is now no central authority accountable for air quality issues. Instead, there is a mix of City, State, and Federal agencies which are performing various regulatory roles they were used to performing from before 9/11, but in the post-9/11 world it is unclear what their formal responsibilities are, what they are responsible to report and who they need to report to.
To sum up, the issue of air quality standards and how they may have been improved after 9/11 seems to focus on alerting procedures. This means how have procedures improved which will alert people better next time in the event of an emergency, and also who is monitoring and alerting people about the current air quality relating to the post-9/11 demolition and construction boom.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Giambusso Memo
Building Battles:
OVERVIEW:
I am attempting to examine the political battles that go into building and development. I hope to examine specific sites and demonstrate how the pressures of City Council, Congress, developers, community groups etc, shape building safety. I would like to look at a development that has been finished, one that is being constructed and ne that is in the planning stages.
I am looking specifically to examine how the race to develop may be having a deleterious effect on building safety. Politicians and developers are often involved in projects that garner government funds (affordable housing, brownfield development) making enterprises more lucrative for builders.
The question I hope to raise is how safe are these projects, what are the standards and what have been the real-life consequences of projects that perhaps moved too quickly for political economic expediency while ignoring safety standards.
FIRST SITE: Gowanus Canal, “Public Place”
Lede(?)
Along the trendy restaurants of Cobble Hill and the nouveau-chic bars of Park Slope, underneath the lacquered hardwood walkups, where hipsters, yuppies and trustafarians, meet, live, and raise their young, between two lands conquered by the inexorable armies of gentrification, there runs a river of poison--a mile and half of putrid waterway that once served the factories and chemical plants lining its banks.
For over a century the Gowanus Canal has acted as an industrial sewer, suffering the runoff of tanneries, machine shops, and factories churning soap, paint, ink, and sulfur. The waterway, which connects Upper New York Bay to the neighborhoods of Red Hook, South Brooklyn, and Park Slope, runs along a flood basin of toxicity.
In the eyes of politicians, the banks of the Gowanus are a fertile ground for green spaces and affordable housing. In the eyes of developers, the Gowanus valley is a gold prospect promising government funding and quick profits. For the starry-eyed denizens of the outlying neighborhoods, the land along the Gowanus is another chance to recreate the city’s landscape in their own image--complete with coffee shops, dog runs, and tree lined walkways through which to push the seemingly endless stream of baby carriages that follows the march of young urban affluence.
In the fever to develop this infamous stretch, though, some in the community have raised the unwelcome flag of caution and warned that we may not know exactly what has been created underneath these banks. There is skepticism that a layer of sod and some shrubberies may only mask the feet of sledge and chemical waste that have built up over the last one hundred years. Some warn that the consequences of living among these noxious deposits may be dire…
SECOND SITE: Atlantic Yards
THIRD SITE:
LINKS:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=18585
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18300
http://www.gowanus.org/gowanus.htm
http://www.waterfrontmuseum.org/dredgers/links/voice.html
http://www.gowanusartists.com/home.html
http://www.plannyc.org/project-75-Gowanus-Development
CONTACT:
Jessica Pozzuoli: Television Producer, Environmental Activist, Urban Planner
Sarah Ryley: Reporter, Brooklyn Daily Eagle
Bill deBlasio, NYCity Council
David Yassky, NYC Council
Jim Brennan, NYS Assembly
Nydia Velazquez, U.S. House of Reps, 11th District. (The fightin 11th!)
Toll Brothers Development Co.
A.J. Carter, press person at the Empire State Development Corporation
Bob Zuckerman, GCCDC
Patricia Culligan, Professor Engineering Mechanics at Columbia University
NYC D of Buildings
DEP
Seth Donlin, spokesman, Department of Housing Preservation and Development (NYC DHPD)
Bette Stoltz, executive director of the South Brooklyn Local Development Corporation (SBLDC)
TO DO:
GOWANUS
• Get a copy of Culligan’s report/conduct interviews to learn what clean up methods are used in brownfields.
• Also from Culligan, where else have cleanup methods been used and what have been the consequences.
• Contact policymakers, agencies, advocates to determine who is pro, who is against Public Place (GCCDC, SBLDC, EDC, NYS DEP, HPD, D of B, Yassky, Brennan, Velazquez)
• Determine how much Public Place will cost: cleanup, design, construction commercial rent, residential rent, government funding
• Visit other Toll Brothers sites. Do they usually flip brown fields? What do residents say of their developments what is their reputation, who are the architects?
• Visit sites listed in Culligan’s report
OVERVIEW:
I am attempting to examine the political battles that go into building and development. I hope to examine specific sites and demonstrate how the pressures of City Council, Congress, developers, community groups etc, shape building safety. I would like to look at a development that has been finished, one that is being constructed and ne that is in the planning stages.
I am looking specifically to examine how the race to develop may be having a deleterious effect on building safety. Politicians and developers are often involved in projects that garner government funds (affordable housing, brownfield development) making enterprises more lucrative for builders.
The question I hope to raise is how safe are these projects, what are the standards and what have been the real-life consequences of projects that perhaps moved too quickly for political economic expediency while ignoring safety standards.
FIRST SITE: Gowanus Canal, “Public Place”
Lede(?)
Along the trendy restaurants of Cobble Hill and the nouveau-chic bars of Park Slope, underneath the lacquered hardwood walkups, where hipsters, yuppies and trustafarians, meet, live, and raise their young, between two lands conquered by the inexorable armies of gentrification, there runs a river of poison--a mile and half of putrid waterway that once served the factories and chemical plants lining its banks.
For over a century the Gowanus Canal has acted as an industrial sewer, suffering the runoff of tanneries, machine shops, and factories churning soap, paint, ink, and sulfur. The waterway, which connects Upper New York Bay to the neighborhoods of Red Hook, South Brooklyn, and Park Slope, runs along a flood basin of toxicity.
In the eyes of politicians, the banks of the Gowanus are a fertile ground for green spaces and affordable housing. In the eyes of developers, the Gowanus valley is a gold prospect promising government funding and quick profits. For the starry-eyed denizens of the outlying neighborhoods, the land along the Gowanus is another chance to recreate the city’s landscape in their own image--complete with coffee shops, dog runs, and tree lined walkways through which to push the seemingly endless stream of baby carriages that follows the march of young urban affluence.
In the fever to develop this infamous stretch, though, some in the community have raised the unwelcome flag of caution and warned that we may not know exactly what has been created underneath these banks. There is skepticism that a layer of sod and some shrubberies may only mask the feet of sledge and chemical waste that have built up over the last one hundred years. Some warn that the consequences of living among these noxious deposits may be dire…
SECOND SITE: Atlantic Yards
THIRD SITE:
LINKS:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=5&id=18585
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18300
http://www.gowanus.org/gowanus.htm
http://www.waterfrontmuseum.org/dredgers/links/voice.html
http://www.gowanusartists.com/home.html
http://www.plannyc.org/project-75-Gowanus-Development
CONTACT:
Jessica Pozzuoli: Television Producer, Environmental Activist, Urban Planner
Sarah Ryley: Reporter, Brooklyn Daily Eagle
Bill deBlasio, NYCity Council
David Yassky, NYC Council
Jim Brennan, NYS Assembly
Nydia Velazquez, U.S. House of Reps, 11th District. (The fightin 11th!)
Toll Brothers Development Co.
A.J. Carter, press person at the Empire State Development Corporation
Bob Zuckerman, GCCDC
Patricia Culligan, Professor Engineering Mechanics at Columbia University
NYC D of Buildings
DEP
Seth Donlin, spokesman, Department of Housing Preservation and Development (NYC DHPD)
Bette Stoltz, executive director of the South Brooklyn Local Development Corporation (SBLDC)
TO DO:
GOWANUS
• Get a copy of Culligan’s report/conduct interviews to learn what clean up methods are used in brownfields.
• Also from Culligan, where else have cleanup methods been used and what have been the consequences.
• Contact policymakers, agencies, advocates to determine who is pro, who is against Public Place (GCCDC, SBLDC, EDC, NYS DEP, HPD, D of B, Yassky, Brennan, Velazquez)
• Determine how much Public Place will cost: cleanup, design, construction commercial rent, residential rent, government funding
• Visit other Toll Brothers sites. Do they usually flip brown fields? What do residents say of their developments what is their reputation, who are the architects?
• Visit sites listed in Culligan’s report
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Kathryn's Memo
Topic: Green building and the implications for fire/building code compliance
Information gathered so far:
-relevant chapters from PlaNYC
-journal articles
-news articles
-press releases
-contact information for some relevant sources
Thoughts upon gathering this information:
-There's quite a bit of information out there on the implications of integrating Green LEED standards with building codes.
-Some quick facts:
-LOCAL LAW 86: NYC has required that all development (that fits within certain guidelines) must achieve LEED certification.
-The Freedom Tower is planned to be a Gold Standard LEED building
-There is discussion as to whether straw-based installation (which is considered extremely environmentally friendly) can meet building/fire safety codes
-Lucrative tax credits are offered to compensate builders for going green
-The use of recycled construction material is widespread
-Take a look at Executive Order 111 -- enacted by Pataki
-Following LEED standards may actually increase the safety of buildings (ie: in the event of a biological attack, rooms with certain air pressure requirements may be less affected)
-Going green may reduce losses in the event of a natural disaster.
-There is also an event, put on by GreenHomeNYC, which will take a look at how the new building code will address sustainable design. The event is being held on Wednesday, Feb. 20, from 6:30 to 8 p.m. Andrew has kindly offered to go in my place as I will be out of town. (http://www.greenhomenyc.org/events?do=view&event_id=793&PHPSESSID=3a314f2f99fc0ce9f8c51d18bae51fe0)
Questions going forward:
1. What are the implications of building code restrictions on green building strategies?
2. Do green buildings comply with the same codes as other buildings?
3. What are the specific challenges for those who want to build a Silver, Gold, or even Platinum LEED building?
4. Do green buildings supersede code requirements in some areas (ie: air quality)?
5. Are there inspectors which are specifically delegated to green building inspections?
6. What role do tax incentives play in encouraging green building? Does this ever encourage people to cut corners?
7. What are the pros and cons of utilizing straw as an insulator?
8. What specific challenges do New York buildings face (ie: in terms of density)?
9. What are the compliance implications in terms of retrofitting buildings to be LEED certified?
10. What are the challenges of using recycled building materials and meeting code requirements?
Possible Sources:
-Building Safety Journal
-Ecological Building Network
-Sustainlane.com
-Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy
-New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
-NYSERDA
-United States Building Council (LEED certification body)
-New York City Fire Department
-GreenBiz
-National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce
Next steps:
-attend the discussion regarding building code compliance and green building (Andrew to attend on my behalf)…be sure to acquire contact information for follow-up interviews.
-read relevant chapters of PlaNYC
-read Local Law 86
-read the conclusions derived from the post-World Trade Center roundtable
-do some in-depth pre-reporting thinking and then set up some interviews
Information gathered so far:
-relevant chapters from PlaNYC
-journal articles
-news articles
-press releases
-contact information for some relevant sources
Thoughts upon gathering this information:
-There's quite a bit of information out there on the implications of integrating Green LEED standards with building codes.
-Some quick facts:
-LOCAL LAW 86: NYC has required that all development (that fits within certain guidelines) must achieve LEED certification.
-The Freedom Tower is planned to be a Gold Standard LEED building
-There is discussion as to whether straw-based installation (which is considered extremely environmentally friendly) can meet building/fire safety codes
-Lucrative tax credits are offered to compensate builders for going green
-The use of recycled construction material is widespread
-Take a look at Executive Order 111 -- enacted by Pataki
-Following LEED standards may actually increase the safety of buildings (ie: in the event of a biological attack, rooms with certain air pressure requirements may be less affected)
-Going green may reduce losses in the event of a natural disaster.
-There is also an event, put on by GreenHomeNYC, which will take a look at how the new building code will address sustainable design. The event is being held on Wednesday, Feb. 20, from 6:30 to 8 p.m. Andrew has kindly offered to go in my place as I will be out of town. (http://www.greenhomenyc.org/events?do=view&event_id=793&PHPSESSID=3a314f2f99fc0ce9f8c51d18bae51fe0)
Questions going forward:
1. What are the implications of building code restrictions on green building strategies?
2. Do green buildings comply with the same codes as other buildings?
3. What are the specific challenges for those who want to build a Silver, Gold, or even Platinum LEED building?
4. Do green buildings supersede code requirements in some areas (ie: air quality)?
5. Are there inspectors which are specifically delegated to green building inspections?
6. What role do tax incentives play in encouraging green building? Does this ever encourage people to cut corners?
7. What are the pros and cons of utilizing straw as an insulator?
8. What specific challenges do New York buildings face (ie: in terms of density)?
9. What are the compliance implications in terms of retrofitting buildings to be LEED certified?
10. What are the challenges of using recycled building materials and meeting code requirements?
Possible Sources:
-Building Safety Journal
-Ecological Building Network
-Sustainlane.com
-Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy
-New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
-NYSERDA
-United States Building Council (LEED certification body)
-New York City Fire Department
-GreenBiz
-National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce
Next steps:
-attend the discussion regarding building code compliance and green building (Andrew to attend on my behalf)…be sure to acquire contact information for follow-up interviews.
-read relevant chapters of PlaNYC
-read Local Law 86
-read the conclusions derived from the post-World Trade Center roundtable
-do some in-depth pre-reporting thinking and then set up some interviews
Friday, February 8, 2008
Daily Eagle
Two recent, interesting articles from the Broolyn Daily Eagle:
safety legislation:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18200
and toxic legacies , Brooklyn-style:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18300
safety legislation:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18200
and toxic legacies , Brooklyn-style:
http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=27&id=18300
Calendar: Event for Environmental-Health Issues
Who is Coming?????
Community Meetings
CB #1 WTC Redevelopment Committee Monday, February 116:00 PM 250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor
WTC Redevelopment Committee DATE: Monday, February 11, 2008 TIME: 6:00 PM PLACE: Assemblymember Sheldon Silver's Office250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor Agenda1) MTA Update, Uday Durg, MTACCC 2) Fiterman Hall Remediation and Demolition – Update by Pei Cobb Freed Presentation on New Building
Link to WNYC (NPR) Investigative Report on Deutsche Bank
http://www.wnyc.org/go.py?r=http%3A//www.wnyc.org/news/articles/93364
Community Meetings
CB #1 WTC Redevelopment Committee Monday, February 116:00 PM 250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor
WTC Redevelopment Committee DATE: Monday, February 11, 2008 TIME: 6:00 PM PLACE: Assemblymember Sheldon Silver's Office250 Broadway, Assembly Hearing Room, 19th Floor Agenda1) MTA Update, Uday Durg, MTACCC 2) Fiterman Hall Remediation and Demolition – Update by Pei Cobb Freed Presentation on New Building
Link to WNYC (NPR) Investigative Report on Deutsche Bank
http://www.wnyc.org/go.py?r=http%3A//www.wnyc.org/news/articles/93364
Going Green
There's quite a bit of information out there on the implications of integrating Green LEED standards with building codes. Some quick facts:
-LOCAL LAW 86: NYC has required that all development (that fits within certain guidelines) must achieve LEED certification.
-The Freedom Tower is planned to be a Gold Standard LEED building
-There is discussion as to whether straw-based installation (which is considered extremely environmentally friendly) can meet building/fire safety codes
-Lucrative tax credits are offered to compensate builders for going green
-The use of recycled construction material is widespread
-Take a look at Executive Order 111 - enacted by Pataki
-Following LEED standards may actually increase the safety of buildings (ie: in the event of a biological attack, rooms with certain air pressure requirements may be less affected)
-Going green may reduce losses in the event of a natural disaster
There is also an event, put on by GreenHomeNYC, which will take a look at how the new building code will address sustainable design. The event is being held on Wednesday, Feb. 20, from 6:30 to 8 p.m.. Unfortunately, I will be in DC that night and won't be able to make it. Any chance someone can cover it for me? Basically just show up with a tape recorder and perhaps get contact info for follow-up questions? Please and Thanks!!!!!! (http://www.greenhomenyc.org/events?do=view&event_id=793&PHPSESSID=3a314f2f99fc0ce9f8c51d18bae51fe0)
Some helpful resources for all of us might including the Building Code Journal, the American Insurance Association, Construction Monthly, and other sites I have listed below (note that some are green-specific):
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/1546.html
-625 Broadway – recycled materials etc
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/1544.html
-tax credits issued to co-locate/mixed-use buildings
http://www.cdrecycling.org/
-construction materials recycling association
http://www.constructionmonthly.com/Bill_01_05082007.html
-article from Construction Monthly
www.nyc.gov/html/dob/downloads/pdf
/ll_86of2005.pdf
-Local Law 86 – Green Buildings Law
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Updating+the+building+code+to+save+energy-a0121209295
-example of when pressure from green enthusiasts can affect building codes
http://www.iccsafe.org/news/bsj/
-Building Safety Journal
http://eetd.lbl.gov/insurance-research/GoingGreen.html
-“Going Green Reduces Losses” (re: natural disasters)
-LOCAL LAW 86: NYC has required that all development (that fits within certain guidelines) must achieve LEED certification.
-The Freedom Tower is planned to be a Gold Standard LEED building
-There is discussion as to whether straw-based installation (which is considered extremely environmentally friendly) can meet building/fire safety codes
-Lucrative tax credits are offered to compensate builders for going green
-The use of recycled construction material is widespread
-Take a look at Executive Order 111 - enacted by Pataki
-Following LEED standards may actually increase the safety of buildings (ie: in the event of a biological attack, rooms with certain air pressure requirements may be less affected)
-Going green may reduce losses in the event of a natural disaster
There is also an event, put on by GreenHomeNYC, which will take a look at how the new building code will address sustainable design. The event is being held on Wednesday, Feb. 20, from 6:30 to 8 p.m.. Unfortunately, I will be in DC that night and won't be able to make it. Any chance someone can cover it for me? Basically just show up with a tape recorder and perhaps get contact info for follow-up questions? Please and Thanks!!!!!! (http://www.greenhomenyc.org/events?do=view&event_id=793&PHPSESSID=3a314f2f99fc0ce9f8c51d18bae51fe0)
Some helpful resources for all of us might including the Building Code Journal, the American Insurance Association, Construction Monthly, and other sites I have listed below (note that some are green-specific):
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/1546.html
-625 Broadway – recycled materials etc
http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/1544.html
-tax credits issued to co-locate/mixed-use buildings
http://www.cdrecycling.org/
-construction materials recycling association
http://www.constructionmonthly.com/Bill_01_05082007.html
-article from Construction Monthly
www.nyc.gov/html/dob/downloads/pdf
/ll_86of2005.pdf
-Local Law 86 – Green Buildings Law
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Updating+the+building+code+to+save+energy-a0121209295
-example of when pressure from green enthusiasts can affect building codes
http://www.iccsafe.org/news/bsj/
-Building Safety Journal
http://eetd.lbl.gov/insurance-research/GoingGreen.html
-“Going Green Reduces Losses” (re: natural disasters)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)