a stronger, more resilient new york...369 a stronger, more resilient new york from outside of the...

A STRONGER, MORE RESILIENT NEW YORK

Credit: Michael Brunet

CHAPTER 18 | SOUTHERN MANHATTAN 366

Southern Manhattan

Since the Dutch sailed into New York Harbor, the area now known as LowerManhattan has been at the center ofthings. Lower Manhattan is where GeorgeWashington was inaugurated, where ThomasEdison first installed electric streetlights, andwhere what would become the world’s largeststock exchange was founded. Even New YorkCity’s sprawling subway system got its starthere. To this day, the more than 500 acres southof Chambers Street hold a place of disproportion-ate importance for the entire city, region,nation, and world.

As defined in this report, Southern Manhattan,though, is more than just the tip of the borough. It includes the areas along the coastaledges of Manhattan north to 42nd Street, encompassing portions of the neighborhoodsof Chinatown, the Lower East Side, Stuyvesant

Town, and Kips Bay on the east, and Tribeca,the West Village, Chelsea, and Hudson Yards on the west. (See map: Neighborhoods ofSouthern Manhattan)

These neighborhoods, together with LowerManhattan, are critical to the city and region.Southern Manhattan contains the fourth-largest business district in the United States. Itlies at the heart of New York’s transportationnetworks. It is a mass-transit hub, with 19 sub-way lines pulsing underfoot carrying millions ofriders a day. It has heliports, ferry landings, andcontains other key facilities on which all NewYork City depends, from power substations tohealthcare institutions. And, not incidentally, itis home to nearly 200,000 people and approxi-mately 300,000 workers—all while playing hostto tens of millions of tourists each year.

Yet, astonishingly, nearly 40 percent of the landon which Southern Manhattan sits did not evenexistwhen the Dutch first arrived.

As the colony, initially called Nieuw Amsterdamand later named New York, grew and prospered,it became a magnet for people from all over the world, creating constant pressure forexpansion. Residents moved northward, fillingin streams and marshes to make way for roadsand houses. From the earliest days, they alsoexpanded outward, seeking access to thewater. In the beginning, piers, wharves, anddocks were built to facilitate maritime activity.In time, though, the people of the colony addedland as well, held in place by stone or concrete“bulkheads,” or retaining walls, and always at alow elevation. From the time of the Dutch, tothe time of the British, through the modern age,approximately 900 acres would be added to thecoasts of Southern Manhattan. (See map: TheShoreline: Then and Now)

Whether natural or manmade, the coastal areasof Southern Manhattan have been crucial toNew York’s evolution from trading post, tomajor port, to global city—even as the uses ofthese coastal areas constantly evolved.Through the beginning of the 20th century, industry and maritime interests dominated.Eventually, with the rise of the automobile,major arterial highways were paved along thewaterfront. As maritime activity along the Manhattan shoreline declined, especially afterWorld War II, waterfront buildings and piers fellinto disrepair, as did many adjacent inlandareas, which were occupied by dilapidatedcommercial buildings, vacant warehouses, andrundown tenement buildings.

In time, the Southern Manhattan shoreline entered an area of transition. Civic leaders recognized that the waterfront could onceagain become a valuable asset, as a home forparks and new residential and commercial office development. However, through it all,Southern Manhattan’s low-lying coastal edgesremained vulnerable to extreme weather—a fact that Sandy made painfully clearly.

As Sandy’s surge entered New York Harbor, itbreached the bulkheads all around SouthernManhattan, bringing floodwaters one and twoblocks inland and in some cases even farther.Those who lived in, worked in, or owned businesses in Southern Manhattan were, ofcourse, directly affected. The waters thatcoursed into residential buildings, stores,and office buildings compromised building systems, damaged interiors, and destroyedpersonal property.

A STRONGER, MORE RESILIENT NEW YORK367

The Shoreline: Then and Now

Source: Map: Colton 1836 Map; 1609 Shoreline: Welikia Project; 2013 Shoreline: NYCDCP


However, Sandy’s floodwaters also disabled critical infrastructure arrayed all along the coast—infrastructure that served citywide networks—and this had widespread repercussions.

In short order, workplaces, schools, and institutions that served all New Yorkers wereclosed. Even mail delivery was disrupted. Putsimply, the crippling of Southern Manhattanduring Sandy impaired the entire city.

Though many parts of Southern Manhattanhave recovered as of the writing of this report,work remains in certain areas. Additionally,based on recently released flood maps from theFederal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) and the latest climate projections, it islikely that the threats to Southern Manhattanwill increase—with particular vulnerabilityalong the east side and in Lower Manhattan,which is surrounded on three sides by water.

To address these threats, the City has developed a plan for Southern Manhattan thatreflects the overarching goals of this report—to limit the effects of extreme weather whileenabling New York and its neighborhoods tobounce back quickly when those impacts can-not be avoided. The plan addresses SouthernManhattan’s most significant risk—its vulnera-bility to storm surge and rising sealevels—seeking to limit exposures to floodwa-ters, make buildings more resilient, and protectvital infrastructure more effectively. The planalso addresses other risks that the area faces—including more frequent and intense heatwaves and an increase in the most intense hurricanes and associated winds—by drawingon both citywide and locally tailored initiatives.Finally the plan will help strengthen SouthernManhattan’s commercial districts and enhancethe area’s vibrancy as a destination for visitorsand a home for residents—all of which will en-sure that, going forward, Southern Manhattanis able to continue to play its traditional role asa center for the entire city and region.

Area Characteristics

Manhattan (New York County) is the mostdensely populated county in the United States,and the neighborhoods of Southern Manhattanreflect this, all having population densitiesgreater than the citywide average. Thesedensely developed areas contain a total of 285million built square feet, including 180 millionsquare feet of commercial space and 105 mil-lion square feet of residential space. SouthernManhattan is, moreover, a hub of multiple infra-structure systems that serve the wider city andregion. (See chart: Area Population Density)

At the water’s edge, Southern Manhattan isrimmed by a bulkhead wall, which generallyfronts on public space. These spaces rangefrom the East River Park and East RiverEsplanade on the East Side, to Battery Park inthe south, to the public spaces of Battery ParkCity and Hudson River Park on the West Side.On both the East Side and West Side, the area’spublic open spaces are bordered by majorroadways—the FDR Drive and West Street (alsoknown as Route 9A), respectively.

Neighborhoods and ResidentialDevelopmentThough they share geographic proximity, theneighborhoods of Southern Manhattan—whichtogether contain a population of nearly200,000—are distinct. Even with this variety, theneighborhoods of Southern Manhattan generallycan be grouped into three categories: those thatare primarily residential, save for local retail andscattered commercial space; those that are pri-marily residential, with significant commercialspace and other attractions that draw people

Chelsea

Tribeca Lower East Side

Lower Manhattan

Hudson Yards

West Village

StuyvesantTown

ChinatownBattery Park City

Huds

on R

iver

East

Rive

r

Subway Lines

Parks

SIRR Area

Kips Bay

Neighborhoods of Southern Manhattan

West Village

Tribeca

Stuyvesant Town/Kips Bay

Lower Manhattan

Lower East Side

Hudson Yards/Chelsea

Chinatown

Battery Park City

66

NYC average = 42 people/acre

75

175

54

138

118

52

97

Area Population Density

Source: 2010 US CensusNote: Peter Cooper Village included in Stuyvesant Town/Kips Bay


from outside of the area; and those that are pri-marily commercial but increasingly haveresidential populations. Generally speaking, thefirst category applies to the neighborhoodsthat line the East River, the second category applies to the neighborhoods along the HudsonRiver, and the third category applies to theneighborhoods of Lower Manhattan.

Since development in Southern Manhattan hasbeen unfolding over centuries, the area con-tains a rich array of building types, ranging fromwalk-ups of five and six stories to high-rise res-idential towers, and from industrial buildings tocommercial skyscrapers. Though 90 percent ofthe buildings in the area were erected before1983, when modern flood-protection standards

were incorporated into the City’s Building Code,these buildings are primarily constructed of robust materials including steel, masonry, andconcrete. This is generally true even of the over1,700 buildings in Southern Manhattan that arewithin the area’s 19 historic districts. (See chart:Area Buildings Characterized by Type)

Not surprisingly, given the area’s density, nearlyall (99 percent) of the 102,000 residential unitsin Southern Manhattan can be found in multi-story buildings. These include the buildings ofthe 24 public housing developments operatedby the New York City Housing Authority(NYCHA), containing over 15,000 housing units.(See chart: Area Housing Units Characterizedby Building Type)

As described above, the neighborhoods liningthe East River—Chinatown, the Lower EastSide, Stuyvesant Town, and Kips Bay—gener-ally can be characterized as residential areaswith local retail stores, though there are excep-tions to this characterization, including largercommercial establishments in Chinatown andthe hospitals in Kips Bay. In most cases, the98,500 people who live in these four neighbor-hoods reside in multi-story attached buildingsor in developments comprised of high-rise towers in park-like settings.

Of these neighborhoods, the Lower East Side andChinatown (including the so-called Two Bridgesarea) are the most densely populated (and, infact, are the most densely populated neighbor-hoods in all of Southern Manhattan), withpopulation densities of 138 and 175 residentsper acre, respectively. Together these two neigh-borhoods alone are home to 70,400 residents,accounting for nearly 36 percent of all SouthernManhattan residents. Starting in the 1940s, largeportions of these neighborhoods were devel-oped through urban renewal, which led toconcentrations of affordable housing of variouskinds. As a result, the Lower East Side andChinatown contain over 13,000 units of NYCHAhousing, for example.

Kips Bay and Stuyvesant Town, which togetherhave a population of 28,100, are slightly lessdensely populated than the Lower East Sideand Chinatown, with 118 residents per acre.Stuyvesant Town (including neighboring PeterCooper Village) is a planned community builtafter World War II by the Metropolitan LifeInsurance Company, containing 20,000 units ina “tower in the park” setting. Kips Bay, mean-while, is an older neighborhood with a mix ofhigh-rise residential buildings and walk-ups.

By contrast, the neighborhoods along theHudson River, while also possessing a strongresidential base, contain more significant com-mercial and retail space. Together, theseneighborhoods—Tribeca, the West Village,Chelsea, and Hudson Yards—have 47,900 resi-dents and population densities of 52 to 66residents per acre. They also attract sizablenumbers of workers and visitors from outsideof the neighborhoods, working in offices inHudson Square, browsing at galleries inChelsea or visiting the High Line. Generally,these areas are characterized by multi-story at-tached residential buildings as well asmulti-story former industrial buildings that havebeen converted to commercial and residentialuses. In many parts of these neighborhoods,shops and restaurants at the street level addliveliness and character to these areas.

26%

31%

20%

11%

Total: 4,900 Buildings

6% 6%

Multi-Family (elevator)

Mixed-use

Commercial/Non-Profit

Other

1- and 2-Family

Multi-Family (walk-up)

Area Buildings Characterized by Type

Source: DCP PLUTO

41%

49%

Total: 102,000 Housing Units

10%

0%

Multi-Family (elevator)

Mixed-use

1- and 2-Family

Multi-Family (walk-up)

Area Housing Units Characterized by Building Type

Source: DCP PLUTO


Finally, there is Lower Manhattan, a neighbor-hood unlike any other in Southern Manhattan.This is, first and foremost, because it is a regionalcommercial center, attracting 165,000 workersto the area on a daily basis. Here high-rise build-ings predominate, although Lower Manhattanhas low-scale sections, including the historicSouth Street Seaport area, with its brick build-ings from the 19th century. The area alsoincludes Battery Park City—with its generousparks and open spaces—constructed on landfillput in place in the 1970s along the southwestcoast of Manhattan. In all, Lower Manhattan con-tains over 130 million square feet of commercialspace (representing 72 percent of commercialspace in Southern Manhattan), which servesboth the city and the region.

While Lower Manhattan has primarily been acommercial district, in recent years the area’sresidential population has grown rapidly, dou-bling in the last decade to about 45,800residents. Lower Manhattan also serves as amajor tourist destination with over 4,100 hotelrooms, significant retailers, and many historicand cultural attractions, including the NationalSeptember 11 Memorial & Museum.

Socioeconomic CharacteristicsOn average, the poverty rate in SouthernManhattan is consistent with the citywide aver-age of 19 percent, though median householdincome in the area is much greater than the citywide median of $51,300. However, these averages mask large socioeconomic differencesamong the neighborhoods. (See table:Socioeconomic Characteristics)

For example, in the Lower East Side, the poverty

rate is above 30 percent and in Chinatown it isover 40 percent. At the same time, medianhousehold income in the Lower East Side is$29,900, and in Chinatown it is $26,100—bothof which are less than the citywide average. InLower Manhattan, Battery Park City, Tribeca, andthe West Village, by contrast, the most affluentneighborhoods in all of Southern Manhattan,poverty rates are less than half of the citywide av-erage, while median household incomes in theseareas are over $105,000—ranging from two tothree times the citywide median.

Business, Nonprofits, and the Local EconomyEach of Southern Manhattan’s neighborhoodshas its own economic engines, ranging fromneighborhood retailers to small-scale manufac-turers to arts and cultural organizations toFortune 500 companies and nonprofits.Together, these neighborhoods are home toover 21,000 businesses and nonprofits, employing nearly 300,000 people. Though the vast majority (83 percent) of area businesses and nonprofits are small, with fewer

Businesses (by size of business)

50 – 99

Employees (by size of business)

Total: 21K Total: 288.6K

11%

100+

72%

13%

2%2%

10%

5%

11%

19%

55%

1 - 4

5 - 9

Num

ber

of E

mp

loye

es

10 - 49

Profile of Area Businesses

Area PopulationPoverty

Rate

Median Household

IncomeHouseholds

Owner-OccupiedHousing Units

% Homeowners

% Owner-Occupied

Housing Unitswith Mortgage

Median Owner-

Occupied UnitValue

Battery Park City 13,400 5% $170,900 6,200 1,200 19% 66% $764,000

Chinatown 15,200 43% $26,100 6,100 170 3% 63% $673,600

Hudson Yards/Chelsea

20,500 17% $76,900 11,600 3,550 31% 59% $766,600

Lower East Side 55,200 31% $29,900 21,700 2,360 11% 45% $537,000

Lower Manhattan 32,400 7% $124,000 13,700 3,000 22% 62% $785,800

Stuyvesant Town/Kips Bay

28,100 12% $93,000 13,000 400 3% 53% $714,600

Tribeca 16,000 6% $105,900 7,000 2,400 35% 57% $867,800

West Village 11,400 6% $127,400 6,200 2,100 34% 67% $938,600

Citywide Total/Average

8,175,000 19% $51,300 3,050,000 993,500 33% 64% $514,900

Source: 2010 US Census, 2011 American Community Survey, 5-Year estimate

Source: Hoovers

Note: Peter Cooper Village included in Stuyvesant Town/Kips Bay

Socioeconomic Characteristics


than 10 employees, the majority of workers (55percent) are employed by larger businesses,with over 100 employees. (See chart: Profile ofArea Businesses)

By far the most significant concentration ofcommercial activity in Southern Manhattan is inLower Manhattan. In fact, Lower Manhattan accounts for some 52 percent of the businesses and 57 percent of the workers in allof Southern Manhattan. Lower Manhattan, historically home to businesses in the financialsector, has seen its economy increasingly diversify in recent years, with more and moreservice and new media and technology firmsmoving into the area.

Despite being severely impacted by the 9/11terrorist attacks and the financial crisis of 2008,Lower Manhattan has remained characteristi-cally resilient as an economic hub, boastingmore companies as of the writing of this reportthan were in the area prior to 9/11. With majornew developments rising or nearing comple-tion—including 1 and 4 World Trade Center, theNational September 11 Memorial & Museum,and the Fulton Transit Center—the area west ofBroadway is increasingly becoming a focalpoint of business activity.

By contrast, the eastern edge of SouthernManhattan, including the Water Street and SouthStreet Seaport district, while still a major com-mercial area and tourist destination, has facedchallenges in recent years. Many financial serv-ices firms have moved so-called back-officeoperations out of this area, while the Seaporthas, in recent years, lacked the dynamism ofsome of Lower Manhattan’s other popular desti-nations. Of particular concern even before Sandyis the fact that leases for over 3 million square

feet of office space in the Water Street corridorare set to expire over the next two years.

Critical InfrastructureThe high concentration of infrastructure assetsin Southern Manhattan serves not only the areaitself but other parts of Manhattan and, in manycases, the entire city and even the larger New York region. (See map: Area Critical Infrastructure)

For example, Southern Manhattan is home toseveral critical facilities in the electric system.These facilities are key elements of the city’s

electric system, which other city infrastructuresystems depend on to function. Two substationsat Con Edison’s East 13th Street complex, whichis located in the floodplain near the FDR Drive,send power to distribution networks south of39th Street and north of the World Trade Center.Additionally, three other distribution substationsin Southern Manhattan are in the floodplain.These transmission and distribution substationsare critical for the delivery of electrical service to large swaths of the borough.

Healthcare facilities, too, are concentrated inSouthern Manhattan, including four hospitals

South Ferry subway station (prior to Sandy) Credit: bebolgood1/wikimedia

®v®v®v

Huds

on R

iver

East

Rive

r

®v

DEP Wastewater Facilities

Critical Telecommunication Facilities

®v HospitalsSubway Stops

Subway Lines and Tunnels (MTA)

Vehicular Tunnels

Major Arteries

Power Substations

Area Critical Infrastructure


with 2,200 beds—20 percent of the Manhattantotal. Three of these four hospitals are locatedon what is known as “Hospital Row,” betweenEast 23rd and East 34th Streets, along FirstAvenue. These include New York University’sLangone Medical Center, a large nonprofit hos-pital; Bellevue Hospital, a public hospitalmanaged by the Health and HospitalsCorporation (HHC) with the only State-desig-nated regional trauma center in SouthernManhattan; and the Veterans Affairs New YorkHarbor Hospital, a public hospital managed bythe US Department of Veterans Affairs. New YorkDowntown Hospital, located in Lower Manhattan,is the only hospital south of Canal Street. Thereare three additional hospital facilities south of42nd Street including Beth Israel, just outside ofthe Southern Manhattan area on First Avenue.

Southern Manhattan’s telecommunications fa-cilities, too, are indispensable for the residentsand businesses of the entire borough. These in-clude two central offices and seven othercritical facilities, primarily located on the WestSide. Further, important data and land linesmade of copper and fiber serving the area and other parts of Manhattan snake below the streets of Southern Manhattan via under-ground conduit.

Southern Manhattan also hosts importanttransportation assets. For example, its road-ways are key links in the regional transportationnetwork. These include the FDR Drive and WestStreet, which move vehicular traffic betweenLower Manhattan and points north and beyond.On the West Side, the Lincoln and HollandTunnels, operated by the Port Authority of NewYork and New Jersey (the Port Authority), con-nect Manhattan to New Jersey and serve over175,000 vehicles a day. On the East Side, theQueens Midtown Tunnel and Hugh L. CareyTunnel (formerly Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel),which are operated by the MetropolitanTransportation Authority (MTA), connectManhattan with other New York City boroughs,serving approximately 140,000 vehicles perday. An additional two tunnels in LowerManhattan, the Battery Park and West StreetUnderpasses, operated by the New York CityDepartment of Transportation (NYCDOT), con-nect the FDR Drive to West Street and alsoprovide access to the Hugh L. Carey Tunnel.

Of course, the heart of the transportation net-work in Southern Manhattan (and the entirecity) is the subway system. Run by the MTA, thissystem serves 5.4 million riders per day and has22 major lines, all but one of which passthrough Manhattan. A total of seven tunnelsconnect Southern Manhattan and Queens andBrooklyn via the East River and have stationsand/or ventilation and mechanical components

in the area. While Southern Manhattan gener-ally is well-served by subways, LowerManhattan is by far the best-served neighbor-hood, with 12 lines stopping at 17 stations.

Southern Manhattan is also home to two majorDepartment of Environmental Protection (DEP)wastewater facilities. One, known as theManhattan Pumping Station, is located at 13thStreet, and the other, the Canal Street PumpingStation, is on Canal Street. Both facilitate the flowof wastewater to the Newtown Creek WastewaterTreatment Plant in Greenpoint, Brooklyn.

What Happened During Sandy

Though Southern Manhattan’s location withinNew York Harbor protected it from the destruc-tive wave impacts felt in areas along the openAtlantic coast, Sandy’s surge arrived in the areawith great force and height. In fact, at the peakof Sandy’s surge, the tide gauge at the Batteryregistered water heights of more than 14 feetabove Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW), the av-erage of the lower low water height of eachtidal day, or 11 feet above North American

Huds

on R

iver

East

Rive

r

Inundation (Feet Above Ground)

Less Than 3

3 - 6

6 - 10

More Than 10

Area Inundation and Surge Height

Flooding in the Lower East Side during Sandy Credit: Michael Appleton/The New York Times

Source: FEMA (MOTF 11/6 Hindcast surge extent)Note: Inundation more than 10 feet includes below grade areas.


Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88)—eclipsingthe previous high-water mark from HurricaneDonna in 1960 by nearly four feet.

The surge overtopped bulkheads all aroundSouthern Manhattan, sending floodwaters rac-ing inland. Across the area, flooding typicallyreached one to two blocks from the coastlineat depths of two to three feet. In certain areas,though, the waters extended farther inland andto far greater depths. The areas that generallyexperienced the worst inundation were thosethat were built on landfill along the coast, and,farther inland, where there had once beenmarshes and streams that had been built uponcenturies ago. (See map: Area Inundation andSurge Height)

In Southern Manhattan, the greatest extent of in-land flooding was along the area’s eastern edge.There, the surge from the East River breachedthe bulkhead running from Kips Bay toChinatown. Floodwaters not only inundated theEast River Park esplanade, ball fields, and plant-ings, they traversed the FDR Drive, coveringstreets and encompassing buildings. In parts ofthe Lower East Side, much of which is built onlandfill, the water traveled nearly 2,000 feet in-land, almost reaching Avenue B, withfloodwaters up to two feet deep along portionsof Avenue C.

Along Southern Manhattan’s western edge, thesurge rose from the Hudson River, overtoppingits bulkhead. Floodwaters inundated HudsonRiver Park, including piers and playgrounds, tra-

versed West Street, and flowed into inlandstreets. In most of the neighborhoods on theWest Side floodwaters reached one or twoblocks inland at depths of two to three feet, butalong Canal Street, a former waterway that wasfilled in during the city’s northward expansion,water traveled nearly a half-mile inland.

In Lower Manhattan, meanwhile, the surge alsoovertopped bulkheads, though here the water-front edge conditions and inland topographyplayed a significant role in determining the ex-tent of flooding. For example, on the easternportion of Lower Manhattan, which is generallyseparated from the water only by an esplanadeand local streets—with few inland barriers toslow and contain storm surge—waters floweddirectly off of the East River and into the South

Since the 1600s, the inhabitants of Manhattanhave been expanding their island out into thewater surrounding it. This has particularly beentrue in Lower Manhattan. There, the last majorexpansion occurred in the 1970s, with the cre-ation of Battery Park City, a 92-acre housing andcommercial development built on landfill alongthe western edge of Lower Manhattan in theHudson River.

As a general matter, during Sandy, the parts ofLower Manhattan built on landfill proved to be

among the most vulnerable to flooding. BatteryPark City was one significant exception to thisrule, escaping the storm with almost no build-ing damage. This was a direct result of theelevation of the landfill site and the location ofthe buildings.

Around Lower Manhattan, most historic landfillwas created to expand maritime activity.Though well-suited for their original purposes,as these areas transitioned from maritime toother uses, the land never was raised to higher

elevations. By contrast, Battery Park City wasplanned for housing and commercial spacefrom the start—one of the first examples oflandfill being added to Manhattan for a non-maritime purpose. Therefore, the elevation ofthe site was not dictated by the need to accessthe water.

Though FEMA’s 1983 Flood Insurance Rate Maps(FIRMs) for New York City did not exist when thelandfill for Battery Park City was constructed, theengineers who designed the development reliedon then-existing flood hazard information to in-form their planning. As a result, the buildings atBattery Park City generally sit approximatelyseven feet higher than the elevation of the for-mer island edge (now West Street) and generallyat the highest points on the development. Fromthe building sites, Battery Park City gently stepsdown two to three feet to a generous riverfrontesplanade and park area along most of its waterfront edge. Even this edge, though, is approximately three feet higher than other bulkheads in Lower Manhattan.

During Sandy, the bulkhead and elevation ofBattery Park City served the neighborhood well.The bulkhead absorbed wave impacts, and,though water eventually did flood the area’s es-planade and parks, the buildings, set back fromthe water’s edge and on higher ground, hardlywere affected. In fact, the greatest danger manyof the buildings at Battery Park City faced duringSandy came, ironically, from West Street, on thesite’s inland side. This is because Sandy’s surgewas able to inundate the roadway from thenorth and the south—primarily because it hadbeen constructed on landfill at a lower elevationfor the purposes of maritime activities.

Battery Park City: Construction of a New Coastal Edge

Battery Park City landfill before start of development, circa 1974 Credit: The New York Times


Street Seaport area and the buildings alongSouth Street, rising in some areas to eight feetin depth. In this section of Lower Manhattan,the locations with the highest floodwaters cor-responded to areas of low-lying fill that hadbeen added to Manhattan in some of the earli-est years of the city’s history.

On the west side of Lower Manhattan, it wasquite a different story for Battery Park City, be-cause this neighborhood was built to a higherelevation. While Sandy’s surge overtoppedBattery Park City’s bulkhead—and flooded thedevelopment’s esplanade, playgrounds, fields,and plantings—the buildings in the develop-ment, which were constructed on the site’shighest points, for the most part emerged fromSandy unscathed. (See sidebar: Battery ParkCity: Construction of a New Coastal Edge)

In other parts of the west side of LowerManhattan, Sandy brought devastation.Sandy’s surge easily flowed over the lower bulk-heads to the north and south of Battery ParkCity, rushing farther inland and flooding thelow-lying areas of West Street to depths of overfour feet. Waters also spread onto the WorldTrade Center construction site, flooding below-grade areas, including the National September11 Memorial & Museum.

The number of buildings in the area inundatedby Sandy was substantial. In total, over 950 res-idential buildings (containing 46 million squarefeet of space and more than 40,000 units) andover 700 commercial and non-residential build-ings (containing 85 million square feet of space)were affected by floodwaters. Of this total, 24percent of the impacted floor area was in theneighborhoods of the East Side, 28 percent inthe neighborhoods of the West Side, and 48percent in Lower Manhattan. Perhaps most importantly, 58 percent of all impacted residen-tial units were in the neighborhoods of the East Side.

Buildings impacted by flooding generally sus-tained damage that was not of a structuralnature. This was primarily because most of thebuildings in the area are multi-story and con-structed of steel, masonry, or concreteframes—unlike the lighter-frame buildings inmany other areas Sandy inundated. Instead,most building damage in Southern Manhattanwas to critical building systems, business inven-tory, and personal property. Since so many ofthese buildings’ systems were located in base-ments or sub-basements, even in areas wherefloodwaters reached only one to two feet, eleva-tors, water pumps, fire- and life-safety systems,heating and cooling systems, and lighting werecompromised, making conditions for those in thefloors above challenging or untenable.

As a result of Sandy, a large number of buildingsin Southern Manhattan suffered damage. Afterthe storm, the New York City Department ofBuildings (DOB) sent out inspectors to assessdamages in Southern Manhattan and other in-undated areas of the city. These inspectorswere asked to assign “tags” to buildings basedon the observed condition of each structure.“Green” tags indicated less serious damage orno damage at all. “Yellow” tags indicated thatportions of a building might be unsafe or mighthave significant non-structural damage. “Red”tags indicated structural damage. And a sub-category of “red” tags was further categorizedas “destroyed.” (See table: Classification ofBuilding Damage)

The most methodologically rigorous buildingdamage assessment undertaken by DOB wascompleted in December 2012. According tothis assessment, of those buildings citywide

that were tagged either yellow or red (includingthose further classified as destroyed), 13 per-cent were located in Southern Manhattan. Theyellow and red tagged buildings in SouthernManhattan tended to be clustered on the east-ern edge of Lower Manhattan with otherclusters in Tribeca around Canal Street and inparts of Chinatown and the Lower East Side. InSouthern Manhattan, the percentage of redand yellow tagged buildings that were taggedyellow (96 percent) was higher than the per-centage citywide (62 percent). This largely wasa result of the nature of the area’s flooding (still-water inundation, as opposed to destructivewave action), which tended to cause less struc-tural damage and instead caused damage tobuilding systems and contents. (See map:Location and Level of Building Damage)

Though inundation caused a significant amountof damage to Southern Manhattan’s building

Huds

on R

iver

East

Rive

r

DOB Tag DataDestroyedRedYellow

Location and Level of Building Damage

CitywideSouthern Manhattan

96%

62%

4%11%

27%Destroyed

Yellow

Red

DOB Tag Data

Classification of Building Damage

Source: DOB December Tags

Source: DOB December Tags


stock, perhaps the most significant impact thatSandy had on the area resulted from power out-ages that occurred across most of Manhattansouth of 34th Street. As a result of these out-ages, even the many residents of buildings thatwere not flooded or had minimal damage wereleft without light, heat, refrigeration, or waterfor drinking, cooking, flushing toilets, orbathing. In high-rise buildings, elevators alsoceased to function. As a result, many older orinfirm residents who lived on higher floors weretrapped in their apartments—in some casesunable to communicate or gain access to infor-mation through television or the Internet.

The storm also directly or indirectly affectedbusinesses and nonprofits large and small. For

example, the flooding itself wreaked havoc onground-floor retailers, cultural institutions, non-profits, and, especially in Chelsea, art galleries,destroying merchandise and inventory as wellas equipment. In hard-hit areas, such as theSouth Street Seaport district, ground-floor busi-nesses were still closed months after the storm,with some still not reopened as of the writingof this report. Many small businesses, even out-side of the inundation area in SouthernManhattan, like their residential counterparts,also were impacted by the extended poweroutage. This destroyed inventory for food-re-lated businesses, which rely on electricity forrefrigeration, and interrupted business for var-ious types of firms for up to five days, costingmany of them important revenue. The power

outage also disrupted transit, which deprivedbusinesses of customers and made it difficultfor employees to get to work.

Even after the waters receded and the powerwas restored, many small businesses and nonprofits in Southern Manhattan continued tosuffer. This was especially true in the hardest-hit areas like Lower Manhattan, wheretelecommunications disruptions continued forsome months, keeping many businesses andnonprofits from returning to normal businessoperations. In addition, since many high-risebuildings were unoccupied for weeks or evenmonths after Sandy, retailers and others contin-ued to suffer due to a loss of much of theircustomer base.

On the whole, larger businesses in SouthernManhattan were not impacted directly bySandy’s floodwaters, because most of thesebusinesses occupied offices on upper floors inmulti-story buildings. However, these office-ori-ented businesses were greatly impacted byflooding that impaired their buildings’ systems.As with residents, small businesses, and non-profits, large businesses located inland alsowere affected by power outages and transit disruptions, which prevented them from operating. In total, throughout SouthernManhattan, over 88 million square feet of com-mercial space and 6,500 businesses were inareas affected by flooding. An additional 260million square feet and 68,000 businesses werein areas affected by power outages. Even aslarge businesses in Southern Manhattan beganto resume operations when power and transitwere restored, a significant number of those inLower Manhattan were not able to do so forweeks or months because of various issues including those relating to telecommunications.

Sandy’s impact on the Southern Manhattanelectric system began before Sandy rolled in,when Con Edison shut down two of its electricalnetworks in the area preemptively to preventsevere damage and minimize potential down-time to underground distribution equipment(located in vaults beneath sidewalks), plungingover 6,500 hundred “customers” (and manymore individuals) on the East Side of LowerManhattan into darkness. Once the storm ar-rived, Sandy’s surge caused damage to thesubstations at the East 13th Street complex andat the Seaport, shutting down 11 additional dis-tribution networks and leaving another 225,000customers without electricity—nearly all ofSouthern Manhattan south of 34th Street aswell as certain areas north to 39th Street.Everything from traffic lights and street lights tocellular antennas was affected. Power to thewhole area was not restored fully until aboutfour days after the storm, only after substation

Flooding in South Ferry Station Credit: MTAPhotos

Power outage in Southern Manhattan during Sandy Credit: Michael Tapp


equipment was finally restored. Since manyarea buildings suffered damage to their electri-cal systems, building-level power outageswould continue in many cases for several days.

The storm also affected Southern Manhattan’shospitals and their patients. New YorkDowntown Hospital, for example, evacuatedpatients before the storm once it was told thatits power would be preemptively shut off, re-opening, when power returned to the area. TheVeterans Affairs New York Harbor Hospital alsoevacuated prior to the storm due to its proxim-ity to the East River. New York University’sLangone Medical Center and BellevueHospitals, though also near the East River, re-mained open as Sandy approached. Eventually,Sandy’s surge sent floodwaters into the lowerlevels of these two hospitals (as well as theVeterans Affairs New York Harbor Hospital).This eventually forced New York University’sLangone Medical Center and Bellevue to evac-uate, during the storm in the case of the former,as its critical building systems failed, and, in thecase of the latter, shortly after the storm. Allthree damaged hospitals remained partially orfully closed for months following the storm, re-ducing Manhattan’s capacity by 2,100 beds ornearly 65 percent of the bed capacity below42nd Street.

Critical telecommunications facilities andbelow-grade network cabling in SouthernManhattan also were impacted significantly bySandy. Two central offices experienced seriousdamage from floodwaters, disconnecting busi-nesses and residents who depended on theselocations to relay phone and cable signals.Although one central office was functionalwithin a day, the other remained closed for 11days. Even more significantly, in LowerManhattan, 95 percent of the copper wires inthe neighborhood were destroyed by the cor-rosive floodwaters they soaked in during andafter the storm. Significant parts of the net-work in Lower Manhattan were down formonths after the storm as Verizon opted to re-place damaged copper wiring with fiber, anupgrade that, over the long run, would benefitcustomers, but caused significant disruption forthem in the post-storm period.

The cell network also experienced failure as cellantennas in Southern Manhattan, which tendto be located on building roofs and to use theelectrical supplies of these buildings, stoppedworking shortly after power went out in thearea. As a result, there was limited or no cellservice below 34th Street for the duration ofthe power outage.

Sandy, meanwhile, had a huge impact onSouthern Manhattan’s transportation infra-structure. The power outage impacted theentire street network south of 34th Street astraffic signals and street lights were knockedout. The surge overwhelmed both of the major Manhattan highways encircling the coastline,inundating them with two to four feet of waterwhich stayed several hours after the storm.Tunnels were flooded including the Holland andQueens Midtown tunnels, which remainedclosed for over a week. The Battery Park andWest Street Underpasses, meanwhile, closedfor two weeks, and the Hugh L. Carey Tunnelwas closed for nearly three weeks as tens of millions of gallons of water were pumpedfrom its depths.

Though the subway system was shut down pre-emptively as the storm approached, it still wasseverely impacted by Sandy, experiencing theworst flooding in its history. Floodwaters en-tered subway stations and tunnels throughnumerous low-lying entry points. Seven EastRiver subway tunnels flooded, two of whichwere immersed in seawater from floor to ceil-ing. While some subway service was restoredin Southern Manhattan and other areas of thecity within two days of the storm, the cross-river tunnels were out of service longer, with

Flooding and building damage in the South Street Seaport area Credit: NYC Department of Small Business Services

some closed for over a week. The South FerryStation, which had only recently been com-pleted and was the southern terminus of the 1train, meanwhile, was damaged so badly thatits predecessor had to be reopened while repairs were made, a process expected to takeyears as of the writing of this report.

Sandy also impacted Southern Manhattan’stwo DEP wastewater facilities. Both experi-enced service outages due to flooding, with theManhattan Pumping Station down for 25 hours,and the Canal Street Pumping Station down for42 hours. Though the shutdowns caused sea-water mixed with runoff and sewage to bereleased into surrounding drainage areas, subsequent testing by DEP showed no signifi-cant water quality impacts.

What Could Happen in the Future

Going forward, the neighborhoods of SouthernManhattan face a variety of risks related to climate change, chief among them surge andflooding from coastal storms, which is likely tobe exacerbated by sea level rise. (See chart:Risk Assessment: Impact of Climate Change)


Scale of Impact

Hazard Today 2020s 2050s Comments

Gradual

Sea level riseFuture sea level rise likely would overtop some bulkheads on a regular basis, resulting in localized flooding

Increased precipitation

Minimal impact

Higher average temperature

Minimal impact

Extreme Events

Storm surge Significant risk of flooding in addition to limited wave action

Heavy downpour Minimal impact

Heat waveGreater strain on power system with potential for more failures; most significantimpact on high-rise buildings

High windsBuilding codes are calibrated to anticipated wind speeds, though existing building stock and equipment may be vulnerable

Risk Assessment: Impact of Climate Change Major Risk Moderate Risk Minor Risk

Flooding of below-grade shops in Lower Manhattan Credit: Damon Winter/The New York Times


Major RisksGiven the area’s coastal exposure, the risk offlooding from storms is significant even today, asillustrated by the Preliminary Work Maps (PWMs)released in June 2013 by FEMA. According to thePWMs, the 100-year floodplain—the area with a 1percent or greater chance of flooding in any givenyear—has expanded beyond the 100-year flood-plain shown on the 1983 maps that were in effectwhen Sandy hit. (See map: Comparison of 1983FIRMs and Preliminary Work Maps)

The PWMs reflect expansions of the floodplaintypically of one block or less in almost all neigh-borhoods, with more pronounced expansions inthe Lower East Side, Kips Bay, and in Chelsea.Like the 1983 maps, the new maps identify a VZone, an area where waves are most forcefuland could exceed three feet in height, all alongthe coastal edge of Southern Manhattan. This VZone generally does not extend inland past the bulkhead.

Though the 100-year floodplain has expandedrelatively modestly in terms of total area inSouthern Manhattan, because of the high density of the area, even this modest expansionhas resulted in a significant increase in the num-ber of buildings in the floodplain. The numberof buildings at risk has increased 73 percent(from 930 to 1,610 buildings, encompassing anadditional 10,000 residential units).

The floodplain on the PWMs includes 61,000residents, over half of whom live in Chinatownand the Lower East Side. The built squarefootage in the Southern Manhattan floodplainhas concurrently increased by 25 percent (from 105 million square feet to 132 millionsquare feet).

Just as importantly, Base Flood Elevations(BFEs)—the height to which floodwaters couldrise during a storm—have generally increasedone to three feet throughout the area. Thesenew BFEs show that the lowest-lying areas,along South Street from Lower Manhattan up toChinatown, could experience flood heights fromsix to eight feet.

The increased BFEs present a particular challenge in Southern Manhattan with its multi-story and historic building stock. Elevation ofground floors, a possible response to higherBFEs in other parts of the country, is simply not possible or economically viable in SouthernManhattan—especially since the ground floorsin many areas are devoted to retail, which addsto the vitality, safety, and economic well-beingof these areas.

According to projections from the New York CityPanel on Climate Change (NPCC), as described

reviRnosduH

reevveiRRitsaasEEa

-

3 0

3 R 001sMRRII

0

FF38

3

91

-0001sMWP3

l

102

palrevO

nialpdoolFraeY-

nialpdoolFraeY-

Comparison of 1983 FIRMs and Preliminary Work Maps

reviRnosdu

uH

viivRRitsaasEEa

rervveiivRRit

Y001MWP3102

iFF ldlF

r

r

d

2

s aeY-001sMWP3102

Y-001s02002detcejorPP

y-001s0502deetcejorP

nFF

i

ialpdoolF

niaallpdoolFraeY

nialpdoolF-raey

Comparison of Preliminary Work Maps and Future Flooplains

Source: FEMA

Buildings & Units100-Year Floodplain

1983FIRMs

2013PWMs

Projected 2020s

Projected 2050s

Residential Buildings 450 940 1,400 1,650

Residential Units 32,000 42,000 60,800 68,000

Commercial andOther Buildings

480 670 910 1,080

Source: DCP PLUTO, FEMA, CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities

Buildings in the Floodplain

Source: FEMA, CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities


Flooding of Battery Park Underpass

in Chapter 2 (Climate Analysis), sea levels areforecast to rise through the 2020s and 2050s.During this period, the floodplain will expand,and throughout the area, flood heights couldincrease, resulting in a risk of even higher flood-waters during storms. (See map: Comparison ofPreliminary Work Maps and Future Floodplains)

The additional growth in the floodplains is an-ticipated in all Southern Manhattan areasincluding Battery Park City. According to NPCC’shigh-end projections, the 2050s floodplain mayextend to First Avenue around Kips Bay and insome areas reach Second Avenue. In the LowerEast Side, the projected floodplain would extend over a block inland and in some areascould reach Avenue A. In Lower Manhattan and Battery Park City, the floodplain is also expected to increase and encompass buildingsat the lower tip of Manhattan. In Tribeca, the

West Village, Chelsea, and Hudson Yards, the projected floodplain would extend inlandnearly another block. Throughout SouthernManhattan, the number of at risk buildingscould rise to approximately 2,300 buildings bythe 2020s (a 43 percent increase over thePWMs) and to over 2,700 buildings by the2050s (a further 18 percent increase over2020). (See table: Buildings in the Floodplain)

Other RisksThe neighborhoods in Southern Manhattan faceother climate risks as well. Sea level rise, for ex-ample, even without extreme weather eventssuch as hurricanes, could, in some communi-ties, lead to increased frequency and severity ofstreet flooding on a chronic basis by the 2050s.This risk, which already exists for the areas tothe north and south of the Brooklyn Bridge, isexpected to increase in the decades to come.

Increased precipitation and more frequent andheavier downpours may result in some flood-ing. However, this risk is likely to be limited tolocalized areas. While future projections forchanges in wind speeds are not available fromthe NPCC, a greater frequency of intense hurri-canes by the 2050s could present a greater riskof high winds in the New York area. This maypose a threat to Southern Manhattan with itsmany densely packed high-rise structures andolder buildings not constructed to modernwind standards.

Finally, higher average temperatures are not expected to cause meaningful impacts on the neighborhoods in Southern Manhattan.However, the increase in the number of heat-waves could lead to more frequent poweroutages.

Credit: Michael Appleton/The New York Times


Since the Special Initiative for Rebuilding andResiliency (SIRR) was launched in December2012, the input of local stakeholders has helpedshape an understanding of what happened dur-ing Sandy, what risks Southern Manhattan facesin relation to climate change, and what ap-proaches make sense to address these risks.

Southern Manhattan is represented by a widearray of elected officials at the Federal, State,and local levels. It also is represented by fivecommunity boards. The area is further servedby a large number of community-based organ-izations, civic groups, faith-based organiza-tions, and other neighborhood stakeholders.All played an important role in relief and recov-ery efforts after Sandy. Throughout the processof developing this plan, SIRR staff benefitedfrom numerous conversations—both formaland informal—with these groups and individu-als, including, in Southern Manhattan, two taskforces that met regularly.

SIRR also held a public workshop in March 2013in Southern Manhattan, part of a series of suchworkshops held citywide in which over 1,000New Yorkers participated to discuss issues af-fecting their neighborhoods and communicatetheir priorities for the future of their homes andcommunities. Generally, the on-the-ground in-sights provided at this public workshop helpedSIRR staff to develop a deeper understandingof the specific priorities of, and challenges fac-ing, the communities of Southern Manhattan.

Overall, out of the various task force and othermeetings and public workshops attended by

SIRR staff since January, several priorities forSouthern Manhattan and the SIRR effort clearlyemerged: • Protect critical infrastructure–power, transit, telecommunications–from outages;

• Protect residential buildings and their vulnerable populations from building system outages;

• Protect retail and commercial businessesfrom flooding;

• Improve infrastructure to prevent futureevents from having widespread impacts; and

• Continue to strengthen post-event communication.

Priorities from Public Engagement in Southern Manhattan

Southern Manhattan community outreach workshop

Southern Manhattan community outreach workshop

Task Force Briefing Frequency# of Stakeholders from Southern Manhattan

Elected Officials Monthly14 City, State, Federal elected officials

Community-Based Organizations

4 - 6 weeks

3 community boards

25+ faith-based, business, and community organizations


INITIATIVES FOR INCREASING RESILIENCY IN SOUTHERN MANHATTAN

Southern Manhattan CommunityRebuilding and Resiliency Plan

Southern Manhattan is an iconic center of activityfor the city, the nation, and the world. Its role asa hub for the city and beyond makes its resiliencyand continued economic vitality critical.

The following is a multilayered plan that not onlyapplies citywide strategies to Southern Manhattan but also provides strategies designedto address the area’s specific needs and particular vulnerabilities. In anticipation of futureclimate change-related risks, this plan proposesways that Southern Manhattan neighborhoodscan adapt by: addressing inundation along theentire coastline; providing opportunities to retro-fit the area’s most vulnerable building stock; pro-tecting and improving critical infrastructure; andfocusing investments in strategic areas, such asthe Water Street office district and the historicSouth Street Seaport, to advance a long-termand sustainable recovery.

Coastal Protection

As Sandy illustrated, the greatest extremeweather-related risk faced by New York City isstorm surge, the effects of which are likely to increase given current projections of sea levelrise. Going forward, it is anticipated that climatechange will render coastal regions of the city,including Southern Manhattan, even morevulnerable to these risks.

While it is impossible to eliminate the chance offlooding in coastal areas, the City will seek to reduce its frequency and effects—mitigating theimpacts of sea level rise, storm waves includingerosion, and inundation on the coastline of thecity generally and Southern Manhattan in partic-ular. Among the strategies that the City will useto achieve these goals will be the following: in-creasing coastal edge elevations; minimizing up-land wave zones; protecting against stormsurge; and improving coastal design and gover-nance. When evaluating coastal protection,other priorities including navigation and ongoingefforts to improve water quality and natural habi-tats also will be considered prior to implementa-tion, where appropriate.

The initiatives described below provide impor-tant examples of how the City intends to ad-vance its coastal protection agenda citywide.These initiatives will have a significant positiveimpact on the residents, businesses, and nonprofits of Southern Manhattan. Taken to-gether, when completed, the first three coastalprotection initiatives described below would

provide enhanced protection for over 750 build-ings representing nearly 27,000 housing unitsas well as many businesses and much of thecritical infrastructure in Southern Manhattan.

For a full explanation of the following initiativesand a complete description of the City’s com-prehensive coastal protection plan, please referto Chapter 3 (Coastal Protection).

Coastal Protection Initiative 6Raise bulkheads in low-lying neighborhoods to minimize inland tidal flooding

Bulkheads provide the first line of defenseagainst flooding in many neighborhoods, in-cluding Southern Manhattan, but throughoutthe city, many bulkheads are built to an eleva-tion that may be insufficient given the latestprojections of sea level rise by 2050. Subject toavailable funding, the City, therefore, will launcha program to raise bulkheads and other shore-line structures across the five boroughs in low-lying areas most at risk of daily or weekly tidalflooding, a phenomenon that could impactparts of Southern Manhattan’s shoreline by the2050s. The Mayor’s Office of Long-Term Plan-ning and Sustainability (OLTPS) will work withthe New York City Economic Development Cor-poration (NYCEDC) to manage this program, tobegin implementation in 2013, in conjunctionwith the new citywide waterfront inspectionsprogram described in Chapter 3.

Coastal Protection Initiative 21Install an integrated flood protection system in Lower Manhattan, including the Lower East Side

Manhattan's East River edge from the BrooklynBridge up through the Lower East Side sufferedthe most extensive inland flooding in SouthernManhattan. The area, which includes parts of Chi-natown and the Lower East Side, is already in the100-year floodplain and the vulnerability of thearea is expected to grow as the climate changes.

This area includes not only a very large residen-tial population (70,000 people), but also a resi-dential population that lives at among thehighest densities in the United States (138 peo-ple per acre, versus a citywide average of 42people per acre and 89 people per acre in therest of Southern Manhattan). The area is alsohome to the largest number of low- and moder-ate-income households in Southern Manhattan,with over 9,000 NYCHA housing units alone.Meanwhile, critical infrastructure located in thearea, which if compromised, could have city-wide impacts. These assets include supportstructures for the subway system, Con Edison

This chapter contains a series of initiatives thatare designed to mitigate the impacts of climatechange on Southern Manhattan. In manycases, these initiatives are both ready to pro-ceed and have identified funding sources as-signed to cover their costs. With respect tothese initiatives, the City intends to proceedwith them as quickly as practicable, upon thereceipt of identified funding.

Meanwhile, in the case of certain other initia-tives described in this chapter, though theseinitiatives may be ready to proceed, they stilldo not have specific sources of funding as-signed to them. In Chapter 19 (Funding), theCity describes additional funding sources,which, if secured, would be sufficient to fundthe full first phase of projects and programs de-scribed in this document over a 10-year period.The City will work aggressively on securing thisfunding and any necessary third-party ap-provals required in connection therewith (i.e.,from the Federal or State governments). How-ever, until such time as these sources are se-cured, the City will only proceed with thoseinitiatives for which it has adequate funding.


substations, a DEP pumping station, and theFDR Drive.

Subject to available funding, the City, therefore,will install the first phase of what is intendedeventually to be an integrated flood protectionsystem for all of Southern Manhattan, along thecoast of the Lower East Side and Chinatown. Thissystem will be composed of permanent features,temporary features, landscaping improvements,and drainage improvements to create a line ofprotection that would be fully deployed only dur-ing pre-storm conditions. The protection wouldbe designed to produce only a minimal impacton, and generally to support, neighborhood fab-ric during non-storm conditions. The expectedalignment of this first phase would start north ofthe Brooklyn Bridge and continue north alongSouth Street to approximately East 14th Street.The goal is for design work on this first phase tobegin in 2014, with completion in 2016. (See ren-dering: Conceptual Rendering of Lower East SideFlood Protection System)

In addition to the foregoing, the City also willconsider extending the first phase of this inte-grated flood protection system south from the

alignment described above to Lower Manhat-tan, including the Financial District. This is be-cause, though the area contains a smaller andless economically vulnerable residential popu-lation and is less densely populated than theLower East Side and Chinatown, it is a majorhub of commercial activity for the region and,like the Lower East Side and Chinatown, con-tains vital infrastructure. Accordingly, the Citywill work with the local community, includingthe local business community and propertyowners, to explore alternative private financingsources for the aforementioned southern ex-tension that could be leveraged to secure newsources of public financing. By way of example,such private sources could include a modestper-square-foot assessment on commercialspace that would be protected by this exten-sion. When completed, the expected align-ment of this extension would start at thesouthern end of the system proposed for theLower East Side and Chinatown and would runsouth along South Street to Battery Park, witha small section running along West Street,north of Battery Park City. If funding were iden-tified, the timing for the southern extensioncould be consistent with the schedule above.

Coastal Protection Initiative 22Install an integrated flood protection system at Hospital Row

Bellevue Hospital and neighboring healthcarefacilities flooded during Sandy and remain atrisk of flooding during extreme weather eventsin the future. Subject to available funding, theCity, therefore, will install an integrated floodprotection system at Hospital Row north of23rd Street in Manhattan. OLTPS will work withmultiple agencies to design and construct thisproject. The expected alignment will be alongthe service road of the FDR Drive, utilizing pas-sive floodwalls and other localized measureswhere appropriate to integrate the system. Thesystem will specifically enhance protection toBellevue Hospital, a critical trauma facility, andcould potentially integrate with existing plansby neighboring facilities operated by New YorkUniversity and the Veterans Administration. Thegoal is to complete design in 2014 with projectcompletion by 2016.

Beyond the priority coastal protection projectsdescribed in Chapter 3, including those summarized briefly above, the City is proposing

Conceptual Rendering of Lower East Side Flood Protection System

Non-storm condition

Pre-storm condition



additional coastal protection initiatives specificto Southern Manhattan’s vulnerabilities.

– – –

Southern Manhattan Initiative 1Create an implementation plan and designfor an integrated flood protection systemfor remaining Southern Manhattan areas

As described above, Sandy showed that the en-tire shorefront of Southern Manhattan is vulner-able to coastal flooding. This vulnerability isexpected to increase as the climate changes.Subject to available funding, the City, therefore,will create an implementation plan for an inte-grated flood protection system to protect theremainder of the Southern Manhattan shore-front, outside of the first phase system de-scribed above. The implementation plan anddesign work will focus on Tribeca, the West Vil-lage, Chelsea, Hudson Yards, Stuyvesant Town,and Kips Bay. The intent is for the entirety of thesystem (first and subsequent phases) to be fully integrated.

Southern Manhattan Initiative 2Conduct a study for a multi-purpose leveealong Lower Manhattan’s eastern edge toaddress coastal flooding and create eco-nomic development opportunities

The eastern edge of Lower Manhattan, partic-ularly from the Battery north to Chinatown, is

one of the lowest-lying areas in Southern Man-hattan and is, therefore, subject to flooding.This vulnerability, demonstrated during Sandy,is likely to get worse as the climate changes.Though the integrated flood protection systemdescribed above could provide substantial pro-tection during extreme weather events, theremay need to be a longer-term approach thatnot only could offer more permanent protec-tion, but also, over time, could be self-financing.Subject to available funding, the City, therefore,will study the creation of a new multi-purposelevee along the eastern edge of Lower Manhat-tan from the Battery Maritime Building to Pier35, which would provide protection againstmultiple climate change-related threats, includ-ing storm surge and sea level rise. This ap-proach would provide the protective value of atraditional levee while also providing new landon which commercial and residential buildingscould be constructed, both to accommodatethe City’s growth and to help finance the construction of the multi-purpose levee. Theintention would be for this new East Riverneighborhood to serve much the same functionas Battery Park City does along the HudsonRiver. (See rendering: Conceptual Rendering ofLower Manhattan Multi-Purpose Levee)

The multi-purpose levee to be studied could ex-tend from the current East River shoreline out tothe existing pierhead line, with the levee's eleva-tion to be determined by current floodplain data,adjusted for expected sea level rise well beyond

2050. Such a protection system would be a majorchange to the coastal edge and require consid-eration of water quality, the river ecology, and in-tegration into the existing urban fabric. Thestudy will, therefore, have to explore integratingexisting waterfront uses—such as Pier 17, theSouth Street Seaport Museum vessels, the heli-port, and the Pier 11 ferry slips—into the designof the levee. Additionally, the study will explorethe opportunities for reimaging the FDR Drive inthe area to improve access to the waterfront andthe new development area. Yet another compo-nent of the study will be an investigation of thepotential to coordinate the construction of thelevee with the extension of the Second AvenueSubway to its intended terminus at HanoverSquare and Water Street. The goal is for NYCEDCto launch this study in 2013.

Buildings

The city’s buildings give physical form to New York.As Sandy demonstrated, however, the buildingstock citywide, including in Southern Manhattan,is highly vulnerable to extreme weather events—a vulnerability that is expected to increase in thefuture. While the coastal protection measures out-lined above are designed to reduce the effects ofsea level rise, storm surge, and wave action on thecity and the neighborhoods of Southern Manhat-tan, these measures will not completely eliminatethose risks. They also will take time to design, fund,and build. It is equally important, therefore, to sup-

Conceptual Rendering of Lower Manhattan Multi-Purpose Levee


plement these measures by pursuing resiliency atthe building level.

To achieve building-level resiliency, the City willseek to protect structures in Southern Manhattanand throughout the five boroughs against a spec-trum of climate risks, including not only floodingbut also high winds and other extreme events.Among the strategies that the City will use toachieve these goals will be to construct newbuildings to the highest resiliency standards andretrofit as many existing buildings as possible sothat they will be significantly better prepared tohandle the impacts of extreme weather events.

The initiatives described below provide impor-tant examples of how the City intends to ad-vance building resiliency citywide. Theseinitiatives will have a positive impact on the res-idents, businesses, and nonprofits of SouthernManhattan. For a full explanation of the follow-ing initiatives and a complete description of theCity’s five-borough building resiliency plan,please refer to Chapter 4 (Buildings).

Buildings Initiative 1Improve regulations for flood resiliencyof new and substantially improved buildings in the 100-year floodplain

Though buildings constructed to modern Con-struction Codes generally performed well inSandy, given the increasing risk of flooding thatis likely with climate change, modifications arewarranted. The City, therefore, will seek to amendthe Construction Codes and Zoning Resolution toprovide for strengthened requirements that will,among other things, improve the design of newbuildings through the application of appropriateresiliency measures that are calibrated to thebest floodplain data available over time and thatcritical building systems are better-protectedfrom flood risks. In 2013, the City—throughOLTPS—will seek to implement these codechanges and the Department of City Planning(DCP) will continue to take zoning changesthrough the public review process, with the goalof adoption before the end of the year. Ifadopted, they will improve resiliency for the sig-nificant amount of mixed-use development likelyto take place within the 100-year floodplain overtime throughout Southern Manhattan.

Buildings Initiative 2Rebuild and repair housing units destroyed and substantially damagedby Sandy

Roughly 23,000 private residential buildings en-compassing nearly 70,000 housing units weredamaged or destroyed during Sandy. Subject toavailable funding, the City, therefore, through

the Mayor’s Office of Housing Recovery Opera-tions (HRO), will provide financial and other as-sistance to owners of residential properties thatwere destroyed or substantially damaged dur-ing Sandy, including approximately 30 residen-tial buildings encompassing approximately 400housing units in Southern Manhattan. To ad-dress the damages sustained and to more effec-tively prepare these significantly damagedbuildings for future storm events, the City eitherwill assist owners or, in limited cases meetingCity criteria, will facilitate the acquisition of prop-erties by new owners whom it will assist, in re-building and substantially improving theseproperties based on the best floodplain dataavailable over time. Additionally, the City is seek-ing to incorporate resiliency measures into ap-proximately 500 to 600 multifamily propertiesthat sustained minor damage including manypublicly assisted buildings properties such asthose developed pursuant to the Mitchell-Lamaprogram and other affordable housing pro-grams. The City, therefore, will support theretrofit of these publicly-assisted buildings, suchas those developed pursuant to Mitchell-Lamaand other affordable housing programs.

Buildings Initiative 3Study and implement zoning changes toencourage retrofits of existing buildingsand construction of new resilient buildings in the 100-year floodplain

The City, through DCP, will undertake a series ofcitywide and neighborhood-specific land usestudies to address key planning issues in se-verely affected and vulnerable communities. Aspart of these studies, the City will identify waysto facilitate the voluntary construction of new,more resilient building stock, and to encouragevoluntary retrofits of existing vulnerable build-ings over time. To be undertaken in close con-sultation with local residents, elected officials,and other community stakeholders, these landuse studies will focus on the challenges posedby the combination of flood exposure of the ap-plicable neighborhoods; the vulnerability of thebuilding types that are found in these neighbor-hoods; and site conditions in these areas thatcan make elevation or retrofit of vulnerablebuildings expensive or complicated.

In Southern Manhattan, DCP, will examine neigh-borhoods with active-ground floor uses andadaptation challenges, including retail and mixed-use buildings in the greater Seaport area and inthe neighborhoods along the East River from theEast Village to Chinatown. Subject to availablefunding, the goal is for DCP to commence thesestudies in 2013. Thereafter, DCP would move toimplement changes, if any, that it deems to be ap-propriate, based on the results.

Buildings Initiative 5Work with New York State to identify eligible communities for the New YorkSmart Home Buyout Program

The City will evaluate opportunities for collab-oration with the State in connection with itshome buyout program, using an objective setof criteria developed by the City, including ex-treme vulnerability, consensus among a criticalmass of contiguous local residents, and otherrelevant factors. It is anticipated that these cri-teria will be met in a limited number of areascitywide. As of the writing of this report, noareas have been identified for this program inSouthern Manhattan.

Buildings Initiative 6Amend the Building Code and complete studies to strengthen wind resiliency for new and substantially improved buildings

As noted above, buildings constructed to mod-ern Building Code standards generally per-formed well during Sandy. Sandy, however,brought relatively weak winds, compared toother hurricanes. Given the possibility of morefrequent or intense wind events in the future,modifications to the Building Code are war-ranted. The City, therefore, through OLTPS willseek to amend the Building Code to provide forstrengthened requirements so that new build-ings citywide can meet enhanced standards forwind resiliency. The City will further studywhether additional wind resiliency standardsshould be required going forward. The amend-ments will be submitted to the City Council foradoption, and the study will commence, in 2013.

Buildings Initiative 7Encourage existing buildings in the 100-year floodplain to adopt flood resiliency measures through an incentiveprogram and targeted mandate

Even if every structure destroyed or damagedby Sandy were rebuilt to the highest resiliencystandards, this would still leave tens of thou-sands of existing structures in the 100-yearfloodplain vulnerable—with more becomingvulnerable as the climate changes. Subject toavailable funding, the City, therefore, will launcha $1.2 billion program to provide incentives toowners of existing buildings in the 100-yearfloodplain to encourage them to make re-siliency investments in those buildings. Of theup to $1.2 billion available through the pro-gram, the City will reserve up to $100 million for1- to 3-family homes, up to $500 million for dis-tribution across the five boroughs based on



each borough's share of vulnerable buildingscitywide, and $100 million for affordable hous-ing developments. The City also will mandatethat large buildings (those with seven or morestories that are more than 300,000 square feetin size) undertake certain flood resiliency invest-ments by 2030. If the City consistently achievesits stated goal of encouraging significant re-siliency retrofit investments for the vast major-ity of the built floor area in the 100-yearfloodplain in the five boroughs, over 30,000housing units encompassing approximately 90million square feet of built space in SouthernManhattan would, over time, be made mean-ingfully less vulnerable. The goal is to launchthese programs in 2013.

Buildings Initiative 8Establish Community Design Centersto assist property owners in developingdesign solutions for reconstruction andretrofitting, and connect them to available City programs

The City, through HRO, will establish CommunityDesign Centers in neighborhoods across the city,potentially including Southern Manhattan, to as-sist property owners in developing design solu-tions for reconstruction and retrofitting, andconnect them to available City programs. TheCenters would be managed by the City—through agencies such as HRO, HPD, DOB, DCP,and NYCEDC—with support from local partners.

Buildings Initiative 9Retrofit public housing units damagedby Sandy and increase future resiliencyof public housing

During Sandy, public housing developmentsowned and operated by NYCHA suffered signif-icant damage throughout the city. Still morewere not impacted by Sandy but remain vulner-able to extreme weather, with even more likelyto become vulnerable as the climate changes.The City, therefore, will through NYCHA, repairpublic housing developments across the Citythat were damaged by Sandy, incorporatingnew flood resiliency measures. In SouthernManhattan, 84 buildings containing nearly10,000 units will be repaired. NYCHA also willundertake a planning process to identify addi-tional resiliency investments in developmentsthat are vulnerable to weather-related events,even if they were unaffected by Sandy. In South-ern Manhattan, NYCHA, subject to availablefunding, is evaluating resiliency investments,subject to available funding, in 12 buildings con-taining over 850 additional units.

Buildings Initiative 10Launch a sales tax abatement program for flood resiliency in industrial buildings

As Sandy demonstrated, many industrial build-ings are vulnerable to extreme weather, withmore likely to become vulnerable as the climatechanges. However, many industrial buildingsoperate on thin margins making it challengingto invest in resiliency. The City, through the NewYork City Industrial Development Agency (NY-CIDA), therefore, will launch a $10 million pro-gram to provide incentives to owners ofindustrial buildings to encourage them to makeresiliency investments in those buildings. Theprogram will prioritize 1- to 2-story buildingswith more than four feet between their actualground elevation and the applicable BFE. InSouthern Manhattan, approximately 27 indus-trial buildings with over 2 million square feet offloor area will be eligible for this program. Thisprogram will be launched in 2013.

Buildings Initiative 11Launch a competition to increase floodresiliency in building systems

Many existing strategies for improving re-siliency in buildings are either imperfect, expen-sive, or a combination of both. The City,through NYCEDC, therefore, will launch an ap-proximately $40 million Resiliency TechnologiesCompetition using allocated Community Devel-opment Block Grant (CDBG) funding to encour-age the development, deployment, and testingof new resiliency technologies for building sys-tems. In Southern Manhattan, 1,610 buildingswill be eligible to benefit from this competition.The program will be launched in 2013.

Buildings Initiative 12Clarify regulations relating to the retrofit of landmarked structures in the 100-year floodplain

The City, through the Landmarks PreservationCommission, will clarify the Commission’s reg-ulations to assist owners of landmarked build-ings and properties in landmarked districts inthe 100-year floodplain who are contemplatingretrofit projects. In Southern Manhattan, thereare over 170 landmarked buildings in the flood-plain, including buildings in portions of 19 his-toric districts. The Commission will issue itsclarifying regulations in 2013.

Buildings Initiative 13Amend the Building Code to improvewind resiliency for existing buildings andcomplete studies of potential retrofits

As noted above, given the possibility for morefrequent intense wind events in the future,modifications to the Building Code are war-ranted. The City, therefore, through OLTPS, willseek to amend the Building Code and expandthe existing DOB Façade Inspection Safety Pro-gram for high-rise buildings to include rooftopstructures and equipment. The City will furtherstudy whether additional wind resiliency stan-dards are required going forward. Theseamendments will be submitted to the CityCouncil for adoption and the study will com-mence in 2013.

Insurance

Insurance can help provide residents and busi-nesses with financial protection against lossesfrom climate change and other types of risks.Sandy not only highlighted the importance of in-surance, it also revealed that many New Yorkersare exposed to flood losses, which are not cov-ered in standard homeowners or small businessproperty insurance policies. Citywide, 95 percentof homeowners carry homeowners insurance,but when Sandy struck less than 50 percent ofresidential buildings in the effective 100-yearfloodplain had coverage through the NationalFlood Insurance Program (NFIP), a Federal pro-gram, administered by FEMA that provides floodinsurance to properties in participating commu-nities like New York City. While larger properties,in particular large commercial properties, tend topurchase flood insurance through the privatemarket, NFIP is the primary source of flood insur-ance for homeowners throughout the country.Furthermore, Sandy drew attention to the signif-icant cost increases in flood insurance that manyNew Yorkers will soon face, resulting from recentreforms to the NFIP as required by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act.

The City will use several strategies to encouragemore New Yorkers to seek coverage and to helpthe NFIP meet the needs of policyholders city-wide. Specifically, the City will work to: addressaffordability issues for the most financially vul-nerable policyholders; define mitigation meas-ures that are feasible in an urban environmentsuch as the Southern Manhattan communitiesand create commensurate premium credits tolower the cost of insurance for property ownerswho invest in these measures; encourage theNFIP to expand pricing options (including op-tions for higher deductibles) to give potentialpolicyholders more flexibility to make choices


about coverage; and launch efforts to improveconsumer awareness, to help policyholdersmake informed choices. The initiatives de-scribed below are important examples of howthe City will advance these strategies. These ini-tiatives will have a positive impact on the resi-dents, small businesses and nonprofits in thiscommunity. For a full explanation of the follow-ing initiatives and a complete description of theCity’s five-borough insurance reform plan,please refer to Chapter 5 (Insurance).

Insurance Initiative 1Support Federal efforts to address affordability issues related to reformof the NFIP

The City will call on FEMA to work with the Na-tional Academy of Sciences to complete thestudy of flood insurance affordability, as re-quired under the Biggert-Waters Act. The Citywill urge its Federal government partners tocomply with this provision of the Act and takeswift action to enact the recommendations.

Insurance Initiative 4Call on FEMA to develop mitigation credits for resiliency measures

The NFIP provides few incentives for propertyowners to protect their buildings from flooddamage and reduce their premiums, other thanby elevating their buildings—actually liftingstructures above flood elevation levels. In anurban environment such as Southern Manhat-tan, for a variety of reasons, elevation can beimpractical, undesirable, and/or economicallyinfeasible. Fortunately, other mitigation optionsare available. The City, therefore, will call uponFEMA to provide appropriate premium creditsfor mitigation measures other than elevation.

Insurance Initiative 6Call on FEMA to allow residential policyholders to selecthigher deductibles

Flexible pricing options can encourage morepeople, especially those not required to carryinsurance, to purchase insurance coverage thatsuits their needs. A higher-deductible optioncan substantially reduce premium costs to pol-icyholders while remaining truly risk-based.Currently under the NFIP, deductibles up to$50,000 are allowed for commercial policies,but residential policies are limited to a maxi-mum deductible of $5,000. The City, therefore,will call upon FEMA to allow homeowners thatare not required to carry NFIP policies to pur-chase high-deductible policies that will protectthem from catastrophic loss; initial estimates in-dicate that doing so could reduce insurancepremiums by about half.

Critical Infrastructure

A resilient New York requires protection of itscritical services and systems from extremeweather events and the impacts of climatechange. This infrastructure includes the city’sutilities and liquid fuel system, its hospitals andother healthcare facilities, telecommunicationsnetwork, transportation system, parks, waste-water treatment and drainage systems, as wellas other critical networks—all vital to keepingthe city, including Southern Manhattan, running.

Utilities

The city’s electric, natural gas, and steam sys-tems are essential to everyday life in areasthroughout the five boroughs, including South-ern Manhattan. As Sandy proved, however,these systems are highly vulnerable to extremeweather events, with 800,000 customers losingelectricity and 80,000 customers losing naturalgas service during Sandy across the City, includ-ing approximately 230,000 that lost electricityservice in the borough of Manhattan. This vul-nerability will only grow as the climate changes.

Among the strategies that the City will use toaddress these challenges for residents ofSouthern Manhattan and other parts of the citywill be to: call for risk-based analysis of low-probability but high-impact weather events tobe incorporated into utility regulation and in-vestment decision-making; call for capital in-vestments that harden energy infrastructureand make systems more flexible in respondingto disruptions and managing demand; and bet-ter diversify the city’s sources of energy. The ini-tiatives described below provide importantexamples of how the City intends to advanceutilities resiliency citywide. These initiatives willhave a positive impact on the residents, busi-nesses, and nonprofits of Southern Manhattan.For a full explanation of the following initiativesand a complete description of the City’s five-borough utilities resiliency plan, please refer toChapter 6 (Utilities).

Utilities Initiative 5Work with utilities and the Public Service Commission (PSC) to harden keyelectric transmission and distribution infrastructure against flooding

Various transmission substations, distributionsubstations, utility tunnels, and undergroundequipment in the city are at risk of flooding dur-ing extreme weather, including 5 substations inSouthern Manhattan. For example, 40 percentof transmission substations are in the 100-year

floodplain today, and 67 percent are likely to bein the 100-year floodplain by the 2050s. TheCity, through OLTPS, will work with Con Edisonand the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) toprioritize these assets based on their roles insystem reliability and to harden them as appro-priate. This effort will begin in 2013.

Utilities Initiative 7Work with utilities, regulators, and gaspipeline operators to harden the naturalgas system against flooding

Although the city's high-pressure gas transmis-sion system performed relatively well duringSandy, there were instances where remote op-eration of parts of the system failed. Addition-ally, the distribution system had localizedoutages due to water infiltration. Seeking tolimit the compromising effects of future floodson both the system’s backbone and the abilityof Con Edison and National Grid to control andmonitor the system, the City, through OLTPS,will work with the PSC, Con Edison, and Na-tional Grid to harden control equipment againstflooding. In addition, the City will call upon ConEdison and National Grid to take steps to pre-vent water from infiltrating its gas pipes. This ef-fort will begin in 2013.

Utilities Initiative 8Work with steam plant operators and the PSC to harden steam plants against flooding

Many buildings within Southern Manhattan—including critical hospitals—rely upon Con Edi-son steam service for heating and cooling. Allof the plants providing this steam are in existingfloodplains and are also vulnerable to non-flood-related power outages. The City, there-fore, will call upon Con Edison and the PSC toincrease the resiliency of these plants by takingflood-protection measures, including addingfloodwalls, sealing building perimeters, raisingequipment, and installing flood-protected back-up generators at each plant (to allow Con Edi-son to continue to deliver steam even duringpower outages).

Utilities Initiative 12Work with utilities and regulators to minimize electric outages in areas not directly affected by climate impacts

Coastal flooding typically requires the shutdownof electrical feeder circuits that could

a stronger, more resilient new york...369 a stronger, more resilient new york from outside of the...

Documents