APPENDIX C-2 MTA/LIRR East Side Access Construction

APPENDIX C-2 MTA/LIRR East Side Access

Construction Protection Plan, April 2004

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................... 1 1.2 OBJECTIVE OF CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION PLAN.................................................. 1

2.0 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS...................................................................... 6 2.1 ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... 6 2.2 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................ 7

3.0 CONSTRUCTION WORKS AND POTENTIAL RESOURCES AFFECTED ......... 9 3.1 MAIN CONTRACT PACKAGES................................................................................... 9

3.1.1 CM016 Manhattan Approach Tunnels Excavation by Roadheader ..................... 10 3.1.2 CM009 Manhattan Tunnels Excavation ............................................................... 11 3.1.3 CQ028 Queens Open-Cut Excavation & Tunnel Under Northern Blvd............... 11 3.1.4 CM008 GCT Concourse Civil and Structural ...................................................... 11 3.1.5 CH053 Harold Structures Part 1.......................................................................... 11 3.1.6 CQ040 Amtrak Building Demolition & Relocation .............................................. 11 3.1.7 CM013 East 38th, 50th and 55th Street Ventilation Facilities ................................ 11 3.1.8 CH054 Harold Structures Part 2.......................................................................... 12 3.1.9 CM012 GCT Caverns, Tunnel Lining, 63rd St. Tunnel Rehab and Bellmouth

Structure................................................................................................................ 12 3.1.10 CQ031 Queens Bored Tunnels and Structures ..................................................... 12 3.1.11 CH060 Cross-Connector ...................................................................................... 12 3.1.12 CQ033 Mid-Day Storage Yard Facility................................................................ 13 3.1.13 CQ034 Sunnyside Passenger Station.................................................................... 13

3.2 STRUCTURES / POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AFFECTED.................. 13 3.2.1 Known and Potential Historic Resources/Structures in Manhattan..................... 14 3.2.2 Known Historic Resources / Structures in Queens ............................................... 14 3.2.3 Potential Archaeological Resources in Manhattan .............................................. 16 3.2.4 Potential Archaeological Resources in Queens.................................................... 18

4.0 PROTECTION METHODOLOGY FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES...................... 19 4.1 PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS............................................................................... 19

4.1.1 Video and Photographic Documentation.............................................................. 20 4.1.2 Individual Property Reports ................................................................................. 20 4.1.3 Grand Central Terminal Pre-construction Survey / Condition Report ................ 21

4.2 MONITORING PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION........................................... 21 4.2.1 Instrumentation Monitoring Locations ................................................................. 22 4.2.2 Routine Monitoring Frequency and Monitoring Duration................................... 22 4.2.3 Monitoring the Effects of Blasting Within the Lower Levels of GCT ................... 25

4.3 REVIEW AND ALERT PROCEDURES......................................................................... 26 4.4 REPORTING ............................................................................................................ 28

5.0 PROTECTION METHODOLOGY FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES .. 29 6.0 WRAP-UP AND CLOSE OUT DOCUMENTATION................................................ 31

April 2004 MTA/ESA Construction Protection Plan/Rev. 2 i

Section 1 Introduction

April 2004 MTA/ESA Construction Protection Plan/Rev. 2 1


Figures Figure 1.1 Plan of East Side Access Project .............................................................................. 3 Figure 1.2 Plans of Queens Alignment....................................................................................... 4 Figure 1.3 Plan of Manhattan Alignment .................................................................................. 5 Figure 3.1 Plan of Known And Potential Historic Resources/Structures In Manhattan.... 15 Figure 3.2 Plan of Known Historic Resources / Structures In Queens ................................. 17 Tables Table 3-1 – Types of Potential Effect ........................................................................................ 10 Table 4-1 – Limits of Influence Zones....................................................................................... 23 Table 4-2 – Definition of Sequence or Stage of the Works...................................................... 23 Table 4-3 – Monitoring Frequency & Duration....................................................................... 24 Table 4-4 – Monitoring for Geotechnical Instruments............................................................ 24 Table 4-5 – Required Action for ‘Review Level’ or ‘Alert Level’.......................................... 26 Table 4-6 – Review and Alert Levels for the Various Criteria ............................................... 28 Table 5-1 – Testing/Monitoring Requirements ........................................................................ 30 Appendices Appendix A Summary Construction Schedule (Based On Rev. 14 Alignment) Appendix B Details of Known and Potential Historic Resources / Structures Within the Manhattan Alignment APE Appendix C Details of Known Historic Resources / Structures Within the Queens Alignment APE Appendix D Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside, Queens Rail Complex Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1 – 8, 10 & 11) Appendix E Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites – East 50th Street & East 38th Street * Investigation / Testing In Advance Of Construction – East 38th Street * Field Monitoring/Testing During Construction – East 50th Street



1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)/Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), is constructing the East Side Access project (ESA) in order to provide a direct connection from Long Island to Manhattan’s Grand Central Terminal (GCT).

The project will ease rail and pedestrian congestion in New York’s Pennsylvania Station and will provide direct travel between Long Island and Manhattan’s East Side (refer to Figure 1.1 for a plan of the ESA alignment). In the process, it will improve travel for commuters from Long Island going to Pennsylvania Station and GCT as well as for commuters using New Jersey Transit (NJT) and passengers using Amtrak’s intercity service which runs to and from Pennsylvania Station. It will also reduce vehicular traffic on the Long Island Expressway.

The ESA project will connect the LIRR’s Main Line and Port Washington Line in Queens with GCT in Manhattan. New track connections at Harold Interlocking in Queens will lead to new tunnels that will be constructed under Amtrak’s Sunnyside Yard, linking with the lower level of the existing 63rd Street tunnel (refer to Figure 1.2 – Plan of Queens Alignment).

The existing 63rd Street tunnel was completed in 1979 and was constructed beneath the East River linking Manhattan (at 2nd Avenue/63rd Street) to Queens (in the area bordered by 29th Street/41st Avenue/Northern Boulevard). The tunnel was constructed with two levels: the upper level which is currently used by New York City Transit (NYCT) and the lower level, currently unused, will be utilized by LIRR commuter trains.

In Manhattan, additional tunnels will be constructed from the western end of the existing 63rd Street tunnel curving south under Park Avenue to GCT (refer to Figure 1.3 – Plan of Manhattan Alignment). At GCT, a new terminal dedicated to LIRR commuter trains will be constructed in caverns beneath the existing lower level. Tail track tunnels will also be constructed extending to 38th Street and new passenger entrances/exits will be constructed around Park Avenue and Madison Avenue. In addition, ventilation facilities and other ancillary buildings for plant and emergency exit shafts will be constructed west of Park Avenue within the station footprint and at East 38th Street, East 50th Street and East 55th Street.

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF CONSTRUCTION PROTECTION PLAN This Construction Protection Plan (CPP) has been developed in order to avoid adverse impacts on historic structures and archaeological resources located within designated influence zones or within construction area boundaries that may be at risk due to construction-related activities.

The CPP has been developed in order to protect historic resources/structures from potentially adverse ground-borne vibrations as well as potentially adverse structure movements, settlements and rotations from construction, excavation and underground/tunneling activities.

In addition, this CPP has been developed to protect archaeological resources that may be found in known sensitive areas and sites to be acquired and developed for the ESA project. This CPP will detail procedures to be adopted in testing for the presence of archaeological resources prior to or during bulk excavation and detail the procedures to be adopted should archaeological



resources be encountered while excavation and construction for the major works contracts is in progress.

The historic resources/structures which may potentially be affected are primarily located along the Manhattan alignment, specifically in the area between GCT and 2nd Avenue near Park Avenue and 63rd Street and in the vicinity of 38th Street. In Queens, two former signal cabins in Sunnyside Yard and the Sunnyside Gardens Historic District located east of 43rd Street and south of Barnett Avenue, are also registered as eligible historic structures.

Studies for the East Side Access project, principally the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), as well as further, more recent, studies by specialist consultants indicate potential archaeological resources may be encountered in the Queens area at Sunnyside Yard, the Existing Rail Yard and at Harold Interlocking. Potential archaeological resources may also be encountered in the Manhattan area where soil excavation will take place at East 38th Street and East 50th Street for proposed ventilation facilities/structures.

This Construction Protection Plan has been prepared by the East Side Access Project Team to satisfy the requirements of the ‘Programmatic Agreement’ – an agreement between the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the MTA and the ‘Preservation Officer’ of the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the implementation of the ESA Project. The Programmatic Agreement executed in January 2001), declares that the FTA, MTA and SHPO agree that the ESA project shall be administered in accordance with stipulations that ensure that potential effects on historic and archaeological resources are taken into account. These stipulations are such that the FTA will be deemed to satisfy all its responsibilities under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 Regulations (“Protection of Historic Properties”). These stipulations pertain to the protection of archaeological resources, protection of historic structures, reporting to SHPO, dispute resolution and any other monitoring activities of the MTA by the FTA and SHPO.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority Capital Construction (MTACC), in consultation with SHPO, will ensure that this CPP will meet SHPO and all other relevant New York City requirements.

It should be noted that this CPP was prepared based on the current status of design. If new design elements of the project are introduced, they will be assessed for their potential impact on historic or archaeological sensitive resources and the determination will be coordinated with SHPO.



Figure 1.1 Plan of East Side Access Project



Figure 1.2 Plans of Queens Alignment



Figure 1.3 Plan of Manhattan Alignment


Section 2 Abbreviations and Definitions

2.0 ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS A list of abbreviations and the definitions of terms used throughout this Construction Protection Plan are presented in the following sub-sections.

2.1 ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviations used within this Construction Protection Plan are listed below.

Abbreviation Term ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AFTP Advance Field Testing Plan APE Area of Potential Effect CPP Construction Protection Plan ESA East Side Access Project FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statement (March 2001) FTA Federal Transit Administration GC General Contractor

GCT Grand Central Terminal IS Instrumentation Specialist

LIRR Long Island Rail Road MNR Metro North Rail Road MTA Metropolitan Transportation Authority

MTACC Metropolitan Transportation Authority Capital Construction NHL National Historic Landmark

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act (Implemented 1966) (Section 106 Regulations – 1999)

NJT New Jersey Transit NR National Register of Historic Places

NTSC National Television System Committee NYCL New York City Landmarks and Historic Districts NYCT New York City Transit PPV Peak Particle Velocity PWSI Project Wide Specialist Instrumentation Contractor SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SHPA State Historic Preservation Act (Implemented 1980)

SR State Register of Historic Places TBM Tunnel Boring Machine TEC Tunnel Engineering Consultant (The Designer for the East Side Access Project

Team)



2.2 DEFINITIONS The definitions of a number of terms used throughout this Construction Protection Plan are defined below.

Area of Potential Effect: The geographic area within which a project may have a direct or indirect effect on historic or archaeological resources, if any are present.

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation: An independent Federal agency established by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 to advise the President and Congress on historic preservation matters. It reviews policies and programs of Federal agencies to improve their consistency with NHPA purposes and administers and participates in the preservation review process established by Section 106 of the NHPA.

Bellmouth: The area of a railroad tunnel where the ends widen to allow for track bifurcations.

Determination of Eligibility: The decision of the SHPO officer on whether properties or resources are eligible for the State and/or National Register of Historic Places.

Dewatering: The removal of groundwater by pumping so as to artificially depress the water table and avoid the difficulties associated with construction below the water table.

Federal Transit Administration: The Federal department of mass transportation. Administratively, it is under United States Department of Transportation (USDOT).

Groundwater: Water in the ground contained beneath the surface of soils and rock.

Historic Period Resources: Remains since the European colonization of the New York area.

Interlocking: The segment of track which consists of a series of switches and signals which enable trains to access different routes or platforms.

Mitigation: Measures designed to lessen or eliminate the adverse impacts resulting from a proposed project or action.

National Register of Historic Places: The Federal list of buildings and sites determined to have historic significance, established by the NHPA.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966: Statute enacted by Congress establishing a nationwide policy to support and encourage the preservation of prehistoric and historic resources and to direct Federal agencies to assume responsibility for considering such resources in their activities. Section 106 does not mandate preservation of such resources but requires Federal agencies to consider the impact of actions on historic properties listed or eligible for listing on the NR.

Native American: American Indians who lived throughout the region prior to the arrival of the Europeans in New York and continuing into the 18th century.

Prehistoric Period Resources: Remains from Native American people and their activities.



State Historic Preservation Office: The State administrative agency responsible for compliance with historic preservations rules, laws and regulations.

State Register of Historic Places: The state list of buildings and sites determined to have historic significance, established by the New York SHPA.


Section 3 Potential Resources Affected

3.0 CONSTRUCTION WORKS AND POTENTIAL RESOURCES AFFECTED 3.1 MAIN CONTRACT PACKAGES This CPP describes the protection measures that will be implemented for known and potential historic resources / structures and potential archaeological resources which are located within a designated influence zone of the planned excavation and construction works for the ESA project. Specifically, this CPP describes the procedures to be followed in respect of the major excavation and construction contracts to be undertaken in Manhattan, in Queens and at Harold Interlocking, as follows:

CM016 Manhattan Approach Tunnels Excavation by Roadheader

CM009 Manhattan Tunnels Excavation

CQ028 Queens Open-Cut Excavation & Tunnel Under Northern Blvd.

CM008 GCT Concourse Civil and Structural

CH053 Harold Structures Part 1

CQ040 Amtrak Buildings Demolition and Relocation

CM013 38th, 50th and 55th Street Ventilation Facilities

CH054 Harold Structures Part 2

CM012 GCT Caverns, Tunnel Lining, 63rd St. Tunnel Rehab & Bellmouth Structure

CQ031 Queens Bored Tunnels and Structures

CH060 Cross-Connector

CQ033 Mid-Day Storage Yard Facility

CQ034 Sunnyside Passenger Station

Table 3-1 below outlines the types of potential effects that may be associated with each of the above major construction contracts. For information, contracts are listed in chronological order.

Contained in Appendix D of this CPP is the ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside, Queens Rail Complex, Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1 – 8, 10 & 11)’. Figure D-1 of this protocol shows the areas of potential archaeological sensitivity for both the Queens and Harold Interlocking areas.

Contained in Appendix E of this CPP is the ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites – East 50th Street & East 38th Street’. Figure E-1 of this protocol shows the areas of potential archaeological sensitivity for the Manhattan area.



Table 3-1 – Types of Potential Effect

Contract

Area of Potential

Sensitivity Type of Potential Effect Associated with Construction Contract CM016 Manhattan Slight potential for settlement or movement of historic structures.

CM009 Manhattan Slight potential for settlement or movement of historic structures.

CQ028 Queens:

Area 1 & 10

Potential for discovery of archaeological resources.

CM008 Manhattan Potential for settlement or movement of historic structures.

CH053 Queens:

Area 11 & 12


CQ040 Queens:

Area 4 & 5


CM013 Manhattan Potential for discovery of archaeological resources at East 38th and 50th Street.

Potential for settlement or movement of historic structures.

CH054 Queens:

Area 6, 11 & 12


CM012 Manhattan Potential for settlement or movement of historic structures.

CQ031 Queens:

Area 4, 5 &11


CH060 Queens:

Area 6 & 8


CQ033 Queens:

Area 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 & 10


CQ034 Queens:

Area 6


A summary construction schedule for the project (Figure A-1), indicating project completion and the running of revenue operations by the middle of 2012, is contained in Appendix A. The commencement dates and duration of the major contracts mentioned above are shown on the schedule.

Each of the major contracts is described below.

3.1.1 CM016 Manhattan Approach Tunnels Excavation by Roadheader

CM016 will be the first contract to require rock excavation in Manhattan. The scope of this contract is to use ‘Roadheader’ machine technology to excavate two short tunnel drives in the bedrock approximately 150 ft below street level. The tunnel drives will extend westwards from



the existing tunnel faces near the end of the 63rd Street tunnel (beneath the 63rd Street Tunnel at 2nd Avenue) for a distance of some 181 ft (eastbound tunnel) and some 152 ft (westbound tunnel) to the location of the planned TBM Assembly Chamber (to be constructed under CM009). If successful excavation is achieved, the Roadheader machine technique may then be employed in place of some of the drill and blast excavation areas planned in the subsequent contracts in order to mitigate potential impacts of such excavation methods.

3.1.2 CM009 Manhattan Tunnels Excavation CM009 involves the excavation, approximately 100 to 150 ft below street level, of multiple tunnel drives utilizing tunnel boring machines (TBMs) following the alignment described in Section 1.1 above. The CM009 contract will also involve forming the TBM assembly chamber near 63rd Street and caverns for bifurcations and starter tunnels between 58th and 59th Streets.

3.1.3 CQ028 Queens Open-Cut Excavation & Tunnel Under Northern Blvd. CQ028 involves a large open-cut excavation in soil overburden in Sunnyside, Queens at the site of the Existing Rail Yard between Northern Boulevard and Amtrak’s Sunnyside Yard. The contract also includes tunneling beneath Northern Boulevard in order to connect to the recently completed CQ026 open-cut excavation.

3.1.4 CM008 GCT Concourse Civil and Structural CM008 includes the demolition of the property at 47 East 44th Street and the preparation of GCT Madison Yard in the west side lower level train shed, beneath and between East 44th and East 49th Streets. The preparation work will be carried out in order for subsequent contracts to proceed which will construct the new concourse and the escalator and stairwell shaft links down to the new underground station caverns and up to the street entrances. This will be achieved by removal of existing internal fitments and rail track, column relocations and structural reframing in the area of the downward circulation links.

3.1.5 CH053 Harold Structures Part 1 CH053 will involve civil works along Harold Interlocking consisting of the construction of new retaining walls in fill areas for the westbound by-pass and the construction of a fill embankment for the relocated westbound by-pass.

3.1.6 CQ040 Amtrak Building Demolition & Relocation In order to permit the future construction of the soft ground tunnels under Contract CQ031, the original planned location of the launch wall has been relocated further to the southeast. This new location requires the demolition of two existing Amtrak buildings – a storehouse and a battery building.

3.1.7 CM013 East 38th, 50th and 55th Street Ventilation Facilities CM013 will involve constructing new ventilation facilities at East 38th Street, 50th Street and 55th Street. For the 55th Street ventilation facility, utility relocation west of Park Avenue will be undertaken and then excavation and construction of the ventilation structure and forming the concrete lining of the running tunnels at the shaft interface will be carried out. For the 38th Street ventilation facility, this will involve the construction of the fan plant structure as well as



the excavation and concreting of the ventilation plant which connects the tunnels to the tail tracks. For the 50th Street ventilation plant, this will involve the demolition of four building structures on East 50th Street. Excavation of a partial shaft and passageway to the west bulkhead wall of the lower level of GCT for construction access usage will also be carried out.

3.1.8 CH054 Harold Structures Part 2 CH054 will involve the modification of the East River Tunnel Approach Structure, the construction of the West Approach Structure for the Cross Connector Tunnel and cut and cover tunnel structure for the Cross Connector Tunnel, modification of the existing track underpass box structure between Queens Boulevard and Honeywell Street, construction of new retaining walls close to the loop track and construction of a train wash facility for Amtrak immediately east of Honeywell Street. In addition, Contract CH054 includes the Track D Approach Structure, underpinning of Pier 5S of the 39th Street Bridge, construction of a new vehicular access bridge over Harold Interlocking at 40th Street, construction of a bridge for the relocated Main Line Track 4, construction of a new retaining wall alongside the south side of the embankment slope between 43rd Street and 48th Street (which supports relocated Main Line Tracks 2 and 4) and construction of a bridge to support the Main Line Tracks 2 and 4 at 48th Street.

3.1.9 CM012 GCT Caverns, Tunnel Lining, 63rd St. Tunnel Rehab and Bellmouth Structure

CM012 will involve the excavation for, and permanent lining of, the station caverns at GCT. The excavation will be carried out using drill and blast techniques in order to form both the east and west station caverns and the station cross passages. CM012 will also involve forming access tunnels and both vertical and inclined raise bores (mechanically bored from GCT Madison Yard) for both passenger entrances and ventilation provisions. In addition, excavation and lining of elevator, utility, stairway and ventilation adits will be carried out. Enlargements will be formed in the tunnels and tail tracks that will be excavated under contract CM009. This will include drill and blast excavation and permanent lining for the tunnel enlargements and wye areas, the 51st Street cross-over cavern, the ventilation plenum at 55th Street and the cross passages. Permanent lining and walkways for the running tunnels and tail tracks will also be constructed under this contract. Rehabilitation of the existing 63rd Street tunnel and final bellmouth structure work will also be carried out under CM012, which will include the construction of the permanent invert slab and walkways.

3.1.10 CQ031 Queens Bored Tunnels and Structures CQ031 will extend the slurry wall constructed under Contract CQ028 southeast towards Sunnyside Yard. This extended, semi-circular slurry wall will form the launch wall for the Queens bored tunnel drives. Four bored tunnels would then be constructed eastwards – three of the tunnels (Track A, B/C and D) will be revenue service linking to Harold Interlocking and the fourth will be non-revenue service tunnels linking to the Mid-Day Storage Yard.

3.1.11 CH060 Cross-Connector The Cross Connector Tunnel provides for the grade separation of selected eastbound Line 1 trains from Pennsylvania Station to the north side of Harold Interlocking. It is proposed for potential use by Amtrak trains to make eastbound moves to the Hell Gate Line and LIRR Port



Washington Branch without conflict from LIRR mainline traffic. It is also proposed that the Cross Connector Tunnel will be used by NJT to access Sunnyside Yard.

3.1.12 CQ033 Mid-Day Storage Yard Facility Contract CQ033 is the construction of the Mid-Day Storage Yard facility. This includes preparing and grading the site area and placing the sub-ballast, environmental remediation works, installation of ballast, ties, track and third rail, installation of the yard drainage system and installation of other yard systems and services.

3.1.13 CQ034 Sunnyside Passenger Station Contract CQ034 is the construction of the new Sunnyside Passenger Station which comprises of two side platforms and a center island platform which will be located beneath Queens Boulevard Bridge. The station provides access to LIRR services heading to Pennsylvania Station. Primary access to the station will be from a headhouse structure located opposite the west side of the Queens Boulevard Bridge. Secondary access will be provided by stairways leading directly to the platforms on the east side of the Queens Boulevard Bridge and from Skillman Avenue.

3.2 STRUCTURES / POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AFFECTED Historic resources/structures and sites of potential archaeological resources which may be affected by excavation and construction works are described below and are categorized into ‘type of resource’, i.e. whether a ‘known’ or ‘potential’ historic structure, or whether a site of potential archaeological resources; and by ‘location’, i.e. Manhattan area or Queens area. The FEIS is the primary source for information in this section regarding historic and archaeological resources with additional input from other specialist consultants who are also involved in the project. These specialist consultants have carried out further information gathering and studies since the issue of the FEIS such as when aspects of the project have changed as the design has progressed further.

Historic Resources/Structures

For historic resources/structures, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) define, under ‘Section 106 Regulations’, that federal agencies must consider the effects of their actions on any properties listed on, or determined eligible for listing on, the National Register for Historic Places (NR). Likewise, the State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) requires that state agencies must consider the effects of their actions on any properties listed on, or determined eligible for listing on, the State Register for Historic Places (SR). The federal agency, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), will then determine whether a proposed action would have any effects on the characteristics of a site that qualify it for the State or National Registers.

Historic resources/structures are defined as either ‘known’ or ‘potential’ resources.

For the ESA Project, the officially recognized historic resources/structures within the area of potential effect (APE) were compiled on a list/register (which is particular to the project as the APE is based on the alignment and associated railway structures). This list is updated as the



status of such structures is determined – or if the alignment changes such that structures fall inside or outside the APE.

This list includes known resources/structures listed on the SR or NR – or those eligible for such listing, National Historic Landmarks (NHL) and New York City Landmarks and Historic Districts (NYCL). Details of potential historic resources have, or will be, submitted to SHPO for concurrence of the determination of eligibility. Upon concurrence, they will either become known resources (and categorized accordingly) or regarded as not eligible and removed.

A list of potential historic resources/structures within the APE was also compiled. Potential historic resources comprise properties that may be eligible for listing on the SR or NR and or designation as NYCLs.

Refer to Appendix B for details of known and potential historic resources/structures within the Manhattan alignment APE.

Refer to Appendix C for details of known historic resources/structures within the Queens alignment APE.

Potential Archaeological Resources

Potential archaeological resources (which are physical remains, usually buried, of past activities on a site) are categorized into ‘prehistoric resources’ (remains from Native American people and their activities such as tools, refuse from tool making activities and habitation sites) or ‘historic period resources’ (remains since the European colonization of the New York area such as battle sites, foundations, wells and privies). Areas where these potential resources may be found are described in Sections 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 below.

3.2.1 Known and Potential Historic Resources/Structures in Manhattan There are 41 known historic resources in Manhattan and 12 potential historic resources. Locations of these known and potential historic resources are shown in Figure 3.1 and details are contained in Appendix B.

The CPP considers these known and potential historic resources as resources that are located within an APE, which is considered to be within a 200 ft plan influence zone of the alignment (i.e. a plan influence zone for structures which lie within this zone to have the potential to be affected by construction related ground-borne vibration and noise).

3.2.2 Known Historic Resources / Structures in Queens There are three historic resources listed in Queens. These historic resources/structure are the two former signal cabins in Sunnyside Yard and the Sunnyside Gardens Historic District.

Switch Tower Q (formerly Signal Cabin Q Yardmaster’s Office) is located at the southwest end of Sunnyside Yard just east of the Queens Boulevard Viaduct. The structure is identified in historic documents pertaining to the construction of Sunnyside Yard. Signal Cabin F, just west of the Thomsen Avenue Viaduct, is one of three original signal cabins built in Sunnyside Yard. Sunnyside Gardens Historic District consists primarily of low scale brick rowhouses surrounding



Central Park

Figure 3.1 Plan of Known and Potential Historic Resources/Structures in Manhattan



landscaped interior courtyards, some apartment houses, parks and playgrounds. Sunnyside Gardens was the first planned community in the United States that reflected the utopian ideal of the British garden city movement. This historic district consists of approximately 16 blocks located east of 43rd Street and south of Barnett Avenue.

Locations of these known and potential historic resources in Queens are shown in Figure 3.2 and details are contained in Appendix C.

3.2.3 Potential Archaeological Resources in Manhattan

Prehistoric Archaeological Resources

FEIS conclusions were that early historic maps indicated the presence of stream courses near to Park Avenue as well as from Vanderbilt Avenue to Madison Avenue in the project area which could have been possible locations of prehistoric settlement or activity. The FEIS concluded that the potential likelihood for prehistoric resources to be encountered at these locations was low to moderate and moderate respectively. The FEIS also concluded that there was no potential, or no significant potential, for non-street portions of the area to contain potential prehistoric resources.

However, the Project’s specialist consultants have carried out further information gathering and studies since the issue of the FEIS and have concluded that there is no potential for prehistoric archaeological resources to be encountered within the project APE in Manhattan.

Historic Archaeological Resources

The FEIS concluded that the project APEs in Manhattan, with the exception of two proposed ventilation shafts – one at East 50th Street and the other at East 38th Street, are not sensitive for historic period resources.

For the proposed ventilation shaft sites, an archaeological study (Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment) was carried out at the site at East 50th Street and concluded that there is the possibility that historic shaft features, such as wells, cisterns, and possibly privies associated with early to mid-19th century structures could be encountered.

Similarly, the Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment prepared for the East 38th Street site concluded that the project site may contain undisturbed resources associated with 19th-century domestic deposits. This sensitive area consists of the rear portion of the lot, which was the location of back yards associated with a house that dates to 1846 - 1852 and a rowhouse that dates to circa 1861. This portion of the lot appears to have been undeveloped up to the present.

Locations of the potential historic archaeological resources in Manhattan (at East 38th Street and East 50th Street) are shown in Figure E-1 of the ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites – East 50th and East 38th Streets’ contained in Appendix E.



Figure 3.2 Plan of Known Historic Resources / Structures in Queens



3.2.4 Potential Archaeological Resources in Queens

Prehistoric Archaeological Resources

Evidence of Native American utilization has previously been identified at two sites within the project area. This is because the project area consisted of marsh, salt meadows and elevated knolls with ridges and wooded areas and hence would have been suitable for utilization by Native Americans. One site falls within the boundary of Sunnyside Yard and the other is directly adjacent. The first site is a village site in Long Island City and includes the entire Sunnyside Yard and surrounding area and may potentially be within, or immediately adjacent to, the project area.

The second refers to a burial site in Long Island City. The location of the site is not exactly known, but is likely to be either on or northeast of Broadway, or on or near Crescent Street. This means that the site may overlap the project area at the northwest edge of Sunnyside Yard.

Owing to lack of clarity, these identified sites are deemed as archaeological potential. It should be noted that types of occupation would have depended on the topography and as portions of this area were low lying, camp sites, settlement and processing areas would have been located on dryer, elevated ground. For this reason, the archaeological potential should be considered as varying.

Historic Archaeological Resources

Dutch Kills, located to the west of the project area, is where there is the earliest recorded activity of settlement by the Europeans. By the time of the American Revolution, there were a few isolated farmsteads clustered along a road that ran between Skillman Avenue and Northern Boulevard. British forces occupied northwest Queens near the end of the 18th century. Middleburg Road (which formerly ran diagonally through the center of Sunnyside Yard to the east of the Honeywell Street viaduct and continued southeast past the current boundaries of the yard) was the main east to west route. The east section of Sunnyside Yard and areas farthest east were heavily manned with British troops with soldiers camped in huts and tents on farms and in fields along the road. During the late 19th century, many of the farms on the site of Sunnyside Yard were subdivided and small frame and brick houses were constructed. By the turn of the century, many houses filled the future Sunnyside Yard site. However from 1903 to 1905 the houses were demolished and the land was leveled in order to make way for the constuction of Pennsylvania Railroad rail yard.

The project area is therefore considered to have potential for a range of historic period archaeological resources which may be buried deeply or are at shallow depth along the former Middleburg Road and in the area of the former dwellings in Sunnyside Yard. There are also potential archaeological resources along the former Middleburg Road relating to the British occupation of the area during the American Revolution.

Locations of the potential archaeological resource areas in Queens are shown in Figure D-1 of the ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside Queens Rail Complex, Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1-8, 10 & 11)’ contained in Appendix D.


Section 4 Protection Methodology for Historic Resources/Structures

4.0 PROTECTION METHODOLOGY FOR HISTORIC RESOURCES A protection methodology is a procedure that will be implemented in order to protect an historic resource/structure from any adverse effects of the excavation and construction works for the project.

The methodology is threefold in that:

1 A detailed inspection will be carried out on, where access permits, both the interior and exterior condition of the structure prior to any excavation or construction works commencing.

2 During the construction, structures that could potentially be impacted by construction activity within a designated influence zone associated with the APE (refer Section 4.2 and Table 4-1), will be monitored for movement, settlement, rotation and construction-induced vibrations. Results of monitoring will be continually reviewed.

3 If any data exceeds certain threshold values (refer to Table 4-6 contained in Section 4.3), an immediate review of the excavation and construction work methods will take place in order to mitigate further adverse effects. This is discussed in Section 4.3 – ‘Review and Alert Procedures’.

4.1 PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS A pre-construction inspection of both potential and known historic structures will be undertaken by an engineering firm licensed to practice in the State of New York (the ‘Inspecting Engineer’) to be selected by the ESA Project Team. The Inspecting Engineer and his team will ascertain any pre-existing damage, existing structural distress and any potential weakness of the structure’s foundations or structural elements as well as non-structural damage.

The nature of the pre-construction surveys will be dependent upon the type and size of the structure to be surveyed and the location of the structure with respect to the designated influence zone associated with the APE, as follows:

Low Rise Structures: Low Rise Structures are defined as buildings no greater than 6 floors. Survey shall include interior first floor and basements and a complete exterior survey. Installation of exterior crack monitors shall be required on readily accessible existing exterior cracks greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) in width with the consent of the property owner. Readily accessible shall mean up to 7 feet from the sidewalk or adjacent to a fire escape or balcony within arm’s reach.

High Rise Structures: High Rise Structures are defined as any structure greater than 6 floors. High Rise Structures shall include an interior survey of basements and common areas existing at first floor level and exterior survey of the building. Particular attention shall be made to identify all visible cracks on the lower 8 floors of the building exterior. Installation of exterior crack monitors shall be required on readily accessible existing exterior cracks greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) in width with the consent of the property owner. Readily accessible shall mean up to 7 feet from the sidewalk or adjacent to a fire escape or balcony within arm’s reach.



Known Historic Structures: In the case of structures designated as Historic, additional interior survey shall be required. In the case of Historic Low Rise Structures, the interior survey shall be extended to include all interior floors and basements. Additionally, a post construction video survey is required of all structures within the Treadwell Farms Historic District. The survey shall comprise a repeat of the required elements of the pre-construction survey so that a direct comparison can be made. This survey shall be carried out only following a direct specific instruction by the ESA Project Team staff.

Special Historic Structures: Special Structures shall include buildings such as churches, cathedrals and national historic landmarks (such as GCT). Structures shall include a complete exterior and interior survey. Installation of exterior crack monitors shall be required on readily accessible existing exterior cracks greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) in width, and selected interior cracks as determined by the Inspecting Engineer and/or the ESA Project Team staff and with the consent of the property owner.

4.1.1 Video and Photographic Documentation

The Inspecting Engineer with prepare documentation material which will document, using both video and photographic means, any potential weakness or signs of structural distress during the inspection of an historic resource/structure that has been selected for a pre-construction survey. Detailed notes will be recorded and, where applicable, sketches will be made to document the condition of the structure. Damage or deterioration of a non-structural nature will also be recorded, again using both video recording and photographs. An assessment of the stability of any applied decorative ornaments or features, together with a procedure addressing any recommended remediation to secure or mitigate potential problems prior to the commencement of any construction activities, will be recorded for inclusion in the report documentation.

The location of all cracks greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) in aperture width shall be recorded with a positional accuracy of +/- 2 ft. Installation of grid crack monitors may be required on selected readily accessible cracks with an aperture width greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) discussed above and as determined by the Inspecting Engineer and/or the ESA Project Team staff.

For historic resource/structure exteriors and interiors, conventional (non-digital) photography will be used using a medium format camera with appropriate professional lenses capable of producing 2.25 x 2.25 inch negatives. Interior details and subsurface photographs may be taken using a conventional (non-digital) professional grade camera with appropriate professional lenses capable of producing 35 mm negatives. Video equipment shall be high-resolution broadcast quality (with a resolution of National Television System Committee (NTSC) 500 horizontal lines or better) with low light capabilities although additional lighting may also be required. The video and audio recording medium shall be VHS videocassette.

Any remediation work carried out to secure or mitigate potential problems will also be photographed and documented accordingly by the Inspecting Engineer.

4.1.2 Individual Property Reports Individual Property Reports shall be prepared for all structures where a pre-construction survey has been carried out, whether residential, commercial or state owned. The written report will be



supplemented with photographic documentation in the form of 8 inch x 10 inch black-and-white photographs keyed to a map or plan in order to provide a concise record of the existing condition of the structure and any potential problems that appear evident. All photographs shall contain the project record identification number and date and time of exposure, printed integrally during processing.

A technical report shall be carefully and objectively written outlining the history, occupancy, type of construction, materials and other pertinent details of the structure. The report shall adequately and logically detail all evidence of structural and non-structural distress, covering framing, exteriors, interiors, roof, basement interiors, details and ornaments/features, sidewalks and curbs and other elements of the structure which have been surveyed. Sketches shall be included as necessary.

The reports will be submitted to MTACC and retained by the ESA Project Team. Upon request, the reports will also be given to the owner of the historic structure and to the General Contractor (GC) who will carry out the main tunneling, excavation or construction works under one of the main contracts listed in Section 3.1.

The pre-construction survey reports will also be submitted to SHPO upon their request.

4.1.3 Grand Central Terminal Pre-construction Survey / Condition Report The project will involve both above ground and below grade construction within public areas of the terminal building of Grand Central Terminal (GCT). The pre-construction survey for GCT shall include a complete exterior and interior survey including all interior levels of GCT which are deemed to be within the APE of excavation, construction, modification or tunneling works associated with the project. The APE for GCT may be considered as 100 ft for settlement and movement and 200 ft for noise and vibration – the latter applicable for the blasting works to be carried out within GCT (refer to Section 4.2.2 and Table 4-1 for details). Installation of exterior crack monitors shall be required on readily accessible existing exterior cracks greater than 2 mm (0.08 inch) in width, and selected interior cracks as determined by the Inspecting Engineer and/or the ESA Project Team staff and with the consent of the property owner.

The pre-construction survey reports will be submitted to the MTACC, to MNR and retained by the ESA Project Team. The report will also be submitted to SHPO upon their request. The Project design drawings and specifications for the construction and modification works contracts for GCT will be submitted to SHPO for consultation purposes.

4.2 MONITORING PRIOR TO AND DURING CONSTRUCTION

In accordance with the contract drawings and from the results of the pre-construction survey reports, geotechnical and structural instrumentation will be installed on surfaces of, or nearby to, existing structures. In some instances, this will include instrumentation installed within the property as well as on the external surfaces of the property with the property owner’s consent. While most of the instrumentation will be permanently installed, some instrumentation will be portable for specific event monitoring, such as seismographs used to monitor blast induced vibrations.



The purpose of this instrumentation will be to measure any movement, settlement, tilt, strain and induced vibrations as a result of the tunneling, excavation and construction works which may have the potential of causing an adverse effect on the structure. The instrumentation will be installed prior to starting the construction works. This will allow a period where initial readings and baseline monitoring readings from the instrumentation may be obtained in order to provide a reference data set (or ambient in the case of vibration and noise).

In addition to the geotechnical and structural instrumentation that will be installed by the Instrumentation Specialist (IS) in accordance with the contract drawings and as a result of the pre-construction surveys, the GC shall install additional instrumentation that he considers required in order to monitor a particular structure which may be affected by his construction works and methods.

All the installed instrumentation will be monitored and reviewed routinely to determine whether the excavation, construction or tunneling works are deemed to have an adverse effect on such structures. Instrumentation data will be reviewed by the ESA Project Team staff on a daily basis.

4.2.1 Instrumentation Monitoring Locations

Geotechnical and structural instrumentation will be installed at locations that are in accordance with the contract drawings for each particular construction works contract. Additional geotechnical and structural instrumentation may be installed on structures, as determined by the Inspecting Engineer and/or the ESA Project Team staff, from the results of the pre-construction survey. Furthermore, the GC may wish to install additional geotechnical and structural instrumentation that he considers required in order to monitor a particular structure which may potentially be affected by his construction works and methods.

Important Notes:

1). It must be realized that although detailed geotechnical and structural instrumentation schedules have been, or will be, proposed under each of the main contracts (which show near exact locations and quantities of proposed geotechnical and structural instrumentation), it will still be the decision of the building or structure owner as to whether he will a) allow the instrumentation to be installed on his building or structure; and b) allow access to the instrumentation for monitoring purposes at the frequency desired by parties interested in obtaining the monitoring results (e.g. MTACC, LIRR, NYCT, ESA Project Team staff, the IS, the GC and other interested parties). However, with respect to item b), it is proposed that much of the instrumentation will be automated thus reducing the actual access requirements and ultimately the inconvenience to the building or structure owner.

2). The procurement strategy for the supply, installation, monitoring and data reduction for geotechnical and structural instrumentation which is to be installed for the Project may be subject to change.

4.2.2 Routine Monitoring Frequency and Monitoring Duration The routine monitoring frequency and duration will depend upon the location of the tunneling, excavation or construction works at any time. As the excavation face / area advances towards a



particular structure, then the monitoring frequency will increase (as clearly there is a greater potential for adverse effects on a building or structure from the increased proximity of the works). Likewise, the duration of monitoring will also be determined by distance between the building or structure and the construction works. These influential distances may be associated with the APE which is considered as being within a 200 ft zone from the alignment. This in turn may be categorized into potential effects for settlements and movements or for noise and vibrations, as shown in Table 4-1 below.

Table 4-1 – Limits of Influence Zones Plan Distance

from Alignment Potential Adverse Effect from the

Tunneling, Excavation or Construction Works

100 ft Limit of Influence Zone for Settlement and Movement

200 ft Limit of Influence Zone for Noise and Vibration

Furthermore, the frequency and duration of monitoring will be determined by the sequence or stage of the tunneling, excavation or construction works, defined as ‘Period ‘a’, ‘b’ or ‘c’’, as shown in Table 4-2 below.

Table 4-2 – Definition of Sequence or Stage of the Works Sequence or

Stage of Works

Tunneling, Excavation or Construction Stage with Respect to Monitoring of Instrumentation

Period ‘a’ When all active excavation works within a zone of 100 ft surrounding the plan location of the relevant instrument have been completed

Period ‘b’ When initial tunnel or excavation support has been installed

Period ‘c’ When all monitoring reading data indicate a stable condition

In consideration of Tables 4-1 and 4-2, the proposed monitoring frequency and duration of the geotechnical and structural instrumentation installed on or near historic resources/structures is defined in Table 4-3 below.



Table 4-3 – Monitoring Frequency & Duration Proposed Monitoring Frequency and Duration of Monitoring

of Geotechnical and Structural Instrumentation

Instrumentation Type

< 200 ft; > 100 ft from Excavation

Works

< 100 ft from Excavation Works

(For active TBM Works, monitoring

will be Once per Shift)

4 Weeks After Period ‘a’, ‘b’ and

‘c’

Until End of Excavation /

Construction* For Settlement Once per Month Once per Day / Shift Once per Week Once per Month

For Movement Once per Month Once per Day / Shift Once per Week Once per Month

For Tilt Once per Month Once per Day / Shift Once per Week Once per Month

For Crack Monitoring Once per Month Once per Day / Shift Once per Week Once per Month

For Change of Strain For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance

only)

For Each Blast For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance

only)

For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance only)

For Change of Load Once per Month Once per Day / Shift Once per Week Once per Month

For Blast Monitoring For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance

only)

For Each Blast For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance

only)

For Each Blast (up to 200 ft distance only)

* ‘End of Works’ refers to the point at which substantial completion for that particular construction contract is achieved. Note: Any new excavation activity within a zone of 100 ft surrounding the plan location of the relevant instrument or any resumption of ground, surface or structure movement requires the restart of the above procedure, as applicable.

It should however be noted that the monitoring frequency will be adjusted accordingly in the unlikely event that ground movement or settlement occurs and consequently if stability is a concern. A contingency monitoring frequency and duration is defined in Table 4-4 below.

Table 4-4 – Monitoring for Geotechnical Instruments

Proposed Monitoring Frequency and Duration of Monitoring of Geotechnical and Structural Instrumentation Should Ground Movement or Settlement Occur and if Stability is a Concern

Instrumentation Type

Immediately After Ground Movement or Settlement and

Stability is Concern

In Affected Zone After Ground has

Stabilized

After Review of Settlement Data and Agreement with Concerned

Parties*

4 Weeks After All

Data Shows Stable Condition

Until end of

Works

For Settlement Every 4 Hours Twice per Week for 1 Month

Once per 2 Weeks for 6 Months

Once per Month Once per Month

For Movement Every 4 Hours Twice per Week for 1 Month

Once per 2 Weeks for 6 Months

Once per Month Once per Month

* ‘Concerned Parties refers’ to MTACC, ESA Project Team, the Owner and SHPO as appropriate.

In addition, should instrumentation monitoring results reach ‘Review Level’ or ‘Alert Level’ criteria, the monitoring frequency and duration shall be increased in addition to excavation/construction operations being altered or stopped/secured. This is described in Section 4.3 below.



4.2.3 Monitoring the Effects of Blasting Within the Lower Levels of GCT

Use of Dynamic Strain Gages – Variance to the Regulations of Monitoring the Effects of Blast Induced Vibrations on Structures using the PPV Limit Criteria of 0.5 inches per second for Historic

Structures For GCT, in the lower level areas of the structure which are in very close proximity to the modification and excavation works, the Project’s Designer – the Tunnel Engineering Consultant (TEC) has proposed the use of dynamic strain gage monitoring to measure the effects of blast induced vibrations on the columns and footings, i.e. where blasting will be carried out at the closest distances to the existing GCT structure. It is proposed to adopt this method as the primary determination of assessing the effects of blasting on the existing GCT structure. The use of dynamic strain gages allows an assessment of how individual structural elements respond to blast induced vibrations as opposed to monitoring by conventional seismographs which measure the vibration exposure of the structure as a whole. Although it is still proposed to use seismographs for vibration monitoring of GCT, these seismographs will be used at street level and, as needed or requested, within the existing upper and lower platform levels of Metro North Rail Road (MNR) operations. The dynamic strain gage monitoring will be used to monitor the structural columns within the lower level of GCT, in areas immediately adjacent to blasting areas.

As blasting works in GCT will be carried out in very close proximity to the existing structure, the use of dynamic strain gages, which give a strain criterion, are used where the response of a particular structural element is desired in order to better assess the actual effects of blasting and vibration exposure on key structural elements. By this method, where a blast carried out adjacent to a seismograph location may show an exceedance of the normal vibration criteria (for historic structures the peak particle velocity (PPV) is normally taken as 0.5 in/sec) but without yielding any real information as to the effects that such vibrations have on the structure. The use of dynamic strain gages allow a better assessment of effects and where such effects may approach levels at which damage could be induced. This method is proposed to be adopted to allow better productivity whilst more accurately assessing structure response of key, individual, structural elements and thus still adequately protecting the structure.

In a report by the TEC (CM009 Vibration Study, July 2003), it was concluded that the maximum expected strain level at the nearest column in GCT, adjacent to the excavation, was calculated to be 31 microstrains (mean) and 164 microstrains (95% confidence level) for blasting 2.5 ft away from building column footings. This level is well below the level of approximately 700 microstrains which is the level hypothesized to cause concrete cracking and spalling. Based on these levels, response levels (‘Review’ and ‘Alert’ criteria) have been defined as 150 microstrains and 500 microstrains respectively as shown in Table 4-6. The TEC’s report is available for review if required.

During construction, if strain measurements between 150 and 500 microstrains are obtained, provisions in the contract documents will require the GC to inspect the affected columns and footings in close proximity to the blasting to ensure that no visible concrete cracking or spalling has occurred before proceeding with subsequent blasting. If measurements of 500 microstrains



are reached, the GC will be required to halt blasting activities and adjust the blasting procedure. These contract documents will be made available to SHPO for information/review if required.

4.3 REVIEW AND ALERT PROCEDURES Detailed review and interpretation of all geotechnical and structural monitoring data will be made in order to determine whether movements, settlements, tilt and vibrations have reached a critical level. These critical levels (known as ‘Response Levels’) are defined as ‘Review Levels’ and ‘Alert Levels’.

The definition of the required action that must be taken should any geotechnical or structural instrument achieve such a level is defined in Table 4-5 below:

Table 4-5 – Required Action for ‘Review Level’ or ‘Alert Level’ Response Level Required Action

Review Level The value of the geotechnical or structural instrumentation reading at which the Project Team and GC jointly assess the necessity of either or all of the following:

• Altering the method of excavation or construction • Altering the rate of excavation or construction • Altering the sequence of excavation or construction • Increase frequency of monitoring of affected instrument

Alert Level The value of the geotechnical or structural instrumentation reading at which the Project Team can order the GC to:

• Cease excavation or construction operations, • Make site and affected properties secure • Take necessary predetermined measures to mitigate movements and

assure the safety of the public and the Work. The Alert Level for each instrument represents the absolute maximum permissible ground or structure movement and the maximum permissible vibration.

Prior to the execution of major component aspects of the works, the GC will prepare a ‘Plan of Action’ for each significant aspect or component work item. This document will outline measures to be taken to arrest ground or structure movements in the event that ‘Review Levels’ are reached or exceeded.



In the event that a ‘Review Level’ is reached:

The GC must meet with the Project Team to discuss the need for response actions. SHPO will be notified by the Project Team.

The GC may be required to provide a response action to the Project Team. If so, within 24 hours of receiving the instrumentation data, the GC must submit a detailed specific plan of action (based on the generalized plan of action).

If a Review Level

is reached If directed by the Project Team, the GC must implement the response actions within 24 hours of submitting a detailed specific plan of action so that the Alert Level is not reached. SHPO will be consulted upon the decision made by the Project Team and their agreement must be obtained before the GC may continue the works.

Increase monitoring frequency of affected geotechnical instruments and install additional instruments if directed by the Project Team.

In the event that an ‘Alert Level’ is reached:

The GC must meet with the Project Team to discuss the need for response actions. SHPO will be notified by the Project Team.

The GC may be required to provide a response action to the Project Team. If so, within 12 hours of receiving the instrumentation data, the GC must submit a detailed specific plan of action (based on the generalized plan of action).

If an Alert Level Is reached

If directed by the Project Team, the GC must implement the response actions within 12 hours of submitting a detailed specific plan of action so that the Alert Level is not exceeded further. SHPO will be consulted upon the decision made by the Project Team and their agreement must be obtained before the GC may continue the works.

Install additional instruments if directed by the Project Team.

‘Review Levels’ and ‘Alert Levels’ for each instrument with respect to movement, settlement, tilt and vibrations, have been or will be defined differently for each of the five major contracts outlined in Section 2.1 above. However, as a guide, Table 4-6 below defines generic criteria for the protection of historic resources/structures.



Table 4-6 – Review and Alert Levels for the Various Criteria Criteria Response Level Limiting Criteria

Review 0.125” Movement Alert 0.25”

Review 0.125” Settlement Alert 0.25”

Review 1:500 Tilt Alert 1:250

Review 0.50 in/sec Vibration (PPV) Alert 0.50 in/sec

Review 150 microstrains * Dynamic Strain Alert 500 microstrains *

Note: * Response levels for dynamic strain monitoring have been taken from the TEC’s ‘CM009 Vibration Study’ (July

2003). It is considered that a value of 700 microstrains was determined as the limit for which spall is observed in concrete if blasting is conducted immediately behind the concrete face. The report concludes that steel building columns are expected to be more resistant to damage than plain concrete. In comparison to vibration criteria, 2 in/sec is a conservative estimate for concrete spall.

4.4 REPORTING The IS shall submit, on a daily basis, raw movement data, settlement data and vibration monitoring data to the Project Team. Formal monitoring reports will be submitted by the IS to the Project Team weekly and will be issued to SHPO upon their request with a covering summary containing the Project Team’s review and interpretation of the data contained within the report.

Should any ‘Review Levels’ or ‘Alert Levels’ be reached, the Project Team will prepare a daily instrumentation monitoring data summary sheet which will also contain their interpretation of the data, and issue this to SHPO. The weekly monitoring reports will also be submitted to SHPO by the Project Team, also with a covering summary of their review and interpretation of the data contained in the report.


Section 5 Protection Methodology for Archaeological Resources

5.0 PROTECTION METHODOLOGY FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES A protection methodology is a procedure that will be implemented in order to protect and allow the recovery of potential archaeological resources during the excavation and construction works for the project. These procedures take the form of ‘Stage 1A Archaeological Assessments’ and ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocols’.

Stage 1A Archaeological Assessments have already been carried out or are in the process of being undertaken for new project elements not assessed in the FEIS. This involved, or will involve, archaeological specialists reviewing both historic information and borings carried out under a previous soil borings program.

For the Stage 1B archaeological review, two types of archaeological field testing protocols have been developed: Field Monitoring (or Field Monitoring/Testing) During Construction and Investigation/Testing in Advance of Construction. These Stage 1B protocols involve archaeology work in the field to test for (in advance of construction), or monitor (during actual excavation works) the presence of archaeological resources.

It is the Stage 1B protocols that specifically detail the requirements and procedures regarding the archaeological interface with the actual construction works.

This CPP deals only with the ‘Field Monitoring During Construction’ in this case for Queens Sunnyside Areas 1 – 8, 10 and 11 and for ‘Field Monitoring/Testing During Construction’, in this case for the Manhattan East 50th Street site.

The ‘Investigation/Testing in Advance of Construction’ is outlined in a separate document – the ‘Advance Field Testing Plan’ (AFTP), applicable to Queens Sunnyside Area 12 and for the Manhattan East 38th Street site. The AFTP will be submitted to SHPO separately.

Table 5-1 below provides a matrix outlining the testing/monitoring requirements for the areas of potential archaeological resources for the Project. This matrix also advises of the relevant documents and protocols for specific areas of potential archaeology. Refer to Table 3-1 for the ESA construction contracts relating to the areas of archaeological sensitivity that will be disturbed by works.


Section 5 Protection Methodology for Archaeological Resources

Table 5-1 – Testing/Monitoring Requirements * Contained in:

Project Area Specific Area Type of Field Testing / Monitoring

(Relevant Stage 1B Protocol) Document: Section: Manhattan East 38th St. In advance of construction AFTP Refer AFTP

“ East 50th St. Monitoring / testing during construction CPP Appendix E

Sunnyside, Queens Area 1 Field monitoring during construction CPP Appendix D

“ Area 2 Field monitoring during construction CPP Appendix D







“ Area 9 No longer exists as a potential resource area -- --



“ Area 12 In advance of construction AFTP Refer AFTP

* As described in the archaeological field testing protocols

Appendix D contains the following protocol:

Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside, Queens Rail Complex Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1 – 8, 10 & 11)

This entire protocol is relevant to the CPP.

Appendix E contains the following protocol:

Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites – East 50th Street & East 38th Street * Investigation / Testing in Advance of Construction – East 38th Street * Field Monitoring / Testing During Construction – East 50th Street

This protocol is relevant to both the CPP and the AFTP (the CPP for the East 50th Street site; the AFTP for the East 38th Street site).

Consultation with SHPO of the procedures and methods outlined in these ‘Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocols’ will be made through this CPP and through the AFTP.


Section 6 Wrap Up and Close Out Documentation

6.0 WRAP-UP AND CLOSE OUT DOCUMENTATION During the period of the works for the main contracts listed in Section 3.1, the project team will prepare interim reports on a yearly basis which will be submitted to the FTA and to SHPO. The reports will contain both information on historic resource / structures as well as archaeological resources. The report will contain information pertinent to the tunneling, excavation and construction works of that contract and the impact that the works have had on historic structures and archaeological resources within the associated APEs. Any incidences or occurrences over the period of the report will be discussed.

Each report will be supplemented with plans, cross-sections and summary instrumentation monitoring data relevant to the period of the report. Photographic plates of changes in condition of historic structures or discovery of archaeological resources will be included in the report.

At the end of each contract, a final report will be produced containing similar information as the yearly interim reports, but including a simplified summary of all instrumentation monitoring results as well as key plans and cross sections showing key stages and / or the advancement of the works throughout the duration of the project. A general discussion will be included which summarizes the works, progress, problems encountered and all incidences and occurrences which were recorded over the duration of the contract. Photographic plates of changes in condition of historic structures or discovery of archaeological resources will be included in the report.

Discussions and changes as a result of any meetings with SHPO that have occurred during the period of the contract in question will be included in the final report.


Appendices

APPENDICES

April 2004 MTA/ESA Construction Protection Plan/Rev. 2

Appendix A

APPENDIX A

Summary Construction Schedule (Based on Rev. 14 Alignment)


Appendix A

Figure A-1 Summary Construction Schedule (Based on Rev. 14 Alignment)


Appendix B

APPENDIX B

Details of Known and Potential Historic Resources / Structures Within the Manhattan Alignment APE


Appendix B

Known Historic Resources in Manhattan

Ref. No.* Name Address NHL S/NR

S/NR Eligibl

e NYCL Pending NYCL

Within APE (see

Notes)1 Treadwell Farm

Historic District East 61st and 62nd Streets between Second and Third Avenues

X A,B

2 Bloomingdale’s 743-765 Lexington Avenue, between 59th and 60rh Streets

X A,C

3 New York Genealogical and Biographical Society

122-126 East 58th Street, between Park and Lexington Avenues

X A,C

4 Ritz Tower Apartment Hotel

465 Park Avenue (between 57th and 58th Streets)

X A,C

5 East 54th-East 55th Streets Historic District

North side of East 54th and south side of East 55th Street, between Park and Lexington Avenues

X A, G

61 Lever House 390 Park Avenue X X E 71 Racquet & Tennis

Club 370 Park Avenue X X E

81 Seagram Building 375 Park Avenue X X E 91 Four Seasons

Restaurant (Interior)

99 East 52nd Street X X E

101 St. Bartholomew’s Church & Community House

Park Avenue at East 50th Street

X X E

111 Waldorf-Astoria Hotel

301 Park Avenue X X E

121 Hotel Intercontinental (formerly Barclay Hotel)

111 East 48th Street X E

131 Postum Building 250 Park Avenue X E 141 New York Central

(Helmsley) Building 230 Park Avenue X X E

151 Roosevelt Hotel 45 East 45th Street X E 161 Vanderbilt

Concourse Building 52 Vanderbilt Avenue X E

171 Yale Club 50 Vanderbilt Avenue X E 181 Vanderbilt Avenue

Building 51 East 42nd Street X E


Appendix B

Known Historic Resources in Manhattan

Ref. No.* Name Address NHL S/NR

S/NR Eligibl

e NYCL Pending NYCL

Within APE (see

Notes)191 Park Avenue

Viaduct Park Avenue between East 40th and 42nd Streets

X X E

201 Grand Central Terminal

East 42nd Street at Park Avenue

X X X E

211 Graybar Building 420 Lexington Avenue X E 221 Grand Central

Terminal Post Office

Southwest corner of Lexington Avenue and East 45th Street

X E

23 43-story Office Building

273-277 Madison Avenue

X D

242 Murray Hill Historic District (LPC and SHPO boundaries differ)

Roughly bounded by Park & Lexington Avenues and 39th and 35th Streets

X X D

25 Williams Club 24 East 39th Street X D 26 Rowhouse 31 East 38th Street X D 273 Rowhouse 40 East 38th Street X D 283 Rowhouse 38 East 38th Street X D 293 Rowhouse 36 East 38th Street X D 303 Rowhouse 34 East 38th Street X D 313 Rowhouse 32 East 38th Street X D 324 Church of our

Savior 59 Park Avenue X D

334 Adelaide L.T. Douglas House

57 Park Avenue X X D

344 15-story Apartment House

55 Park Avenue X D

35 Former Fraternity Clubs Building (now Jolly Hotel Madison Towers)


X D

36 Former Duane Hotel (now Morgans Hotel)


X D

375 Rowhouse 29 East 37th Street X D 385 Four Rowhouses 21-27 East 37th Street X D 395 Rowhouse 19 East 37th Street X D 404 James F.D. and

Harriet Lanier House

123 East 35th Street X X D

41 Villard Houses Madison Avenue between East 50th and 51st Streets

X X F


Appendix B

Known Historic Resources in Manhattan Notes: NHL: National Historic Landmark. SR: New York State Register of Historic Places. NR: National Register of Historic Places. S/NR Eligible: Site has been found eligible for listing on the New York State and National Registers

of Historic Places. NYCL: New York City Landmark. Pending NYCL: Site has been calendared for a public hearing or heard for designation by the New

York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. * Corresponds to Figure 4, “Plan of Known and Potential Historic Resources/Structures in Manhattan, Construction Protection Plan, MTA/LIRR East Side Access.”

1 Included in March 2001 FEIS 2 The boundaries for the New York City Historic District fall within those for the S/NR. Only the S/NR boundaries are mapped.

3 Included in the NR-eligible “32-40 East 38th Street Historic District”. 4 Included in the NR-listed “Murray Hill Historic District”. However, SHPO has indicated that the Church of Our Savior is not a contributing resource due to its age (1956-59).

5 Included in NR-eligible “Rowhouses at 19-29 East 37th Street Historic District”. Within Area of Potential Effect (APE): A: 63rd Street Curve (200-foot APE) B: East 63rd Street Blasting Area (200-foot APE) C: Lexington Avenue Blasting Area (200-foot APE) D: East 38th Street Blasting Area (200-foot APE) E: FEIS analysis areas (50-100-foot APEs) F East 50th Street Vent Plant (200-foot APE) G Park Avenue Tunnel (200-foot APE)


Appendix B

Potential Historic Resources (63rd Street Curve & Park Avenue tunnel APEs) Ref. No.* Name Address Block/Lot Notes A Former American Institute of

Physics 57 East 55th Street, between Madison and Park Avenues

1291/127 1908, Taylor & Levi

B Former Drake Apartment Hotel

434-442 Park Avenue, between 56th and 57th Streets

1292/33 1927; Emery Roth

C Pair of 4-story rowhouses 158-160 East 61st Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1395/45, 145

Pre-1883/1885

D 4-story rowhouses 136-140 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1396/48 Brownstone rowhouses, pre-1885

E 4½-story townhouse 142 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1396/48 Brick townhouse with mansard roof, pre-1881

F Lexington United Methodist Church

148-150 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1396/44 Built 1937, Fond, Butler & Oliver

G 3-story rowhouse 152 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1396/143 Brownstone rowhouse, pre-1885

H 3-story rowhouse 165 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1397/30 Ca. late 19th century

I 4½-story rowhouse 171 East 62nd Street, between Lexington and Third Avenues

1397/32 Brick townhouse, ca. late 19th century

J Former stable 212 East 63rd Street, between Second and Third Avenues

1417/41 1898-1907

K 8-story building 58-63 East 54th Street 1290/28 Built 1923 L 13-story residential building 417 Park Avenue 1309/69 Built 1916

Note: • Corresponds to Figure 3.1, “Plan of Known and Potential Historic Resources/Structures in Manhattan,

Construction Protection Plan, MTA/LIRR East Side Access”. • Resources A-J are within the 200-foot APE for the 63rd Street Curve. • Resources K & L are within the 200-foot APE for the Park Avenue tunnel.


APPENDIX C

Details of Known Historic Resources / Structures Within the Queens Alignment APE


Appendix C

Known Historic Resources in Queens Resource

No. Name Address NHL S/NR S/NR

Eligible NYCL Pending

NYCL 1 Switch Tower Q (formerly

Signal Cabin Q, Yardmaster’s Office)

East of Queens Boulevard Viaduct

X

2 Office (formerly Signal Cabin F)

West of Thomson Avenue X

3 Sunnyside Gardens Historic District

Approximately 16 blocks located east of 43rd Street and south of Barnett Avenue

X

Notes: * Corresponds to Figure 3-2, “Plan of Known Historic Resources/Structures in Queens, Construction Protection Plan, MTA/LIRR East Side Access.” NHL: National Historic Landmark. SR: New York State Register of Historic Places. NR: National Register of Historic Places. S/NR Eligible: Site has been found eligible for listing on the New York State and National Registers of

Historic Places. NYCL: New York City Landmark. Pending NYCL: Site has been calendared for a public hearing or heard for designation by the New York

City Landmarks Preservation Commission.


Appendix D

APPENDIX D

Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside, Queens Rail Complex

Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1 – 8, 10 & 11)


Appendix D

STAGE 1B ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD TESTING PROTOCOL:

SUNNYSIDE, QUEENS RAIL COMPLEX

FIELD MONITORING DURING CONSTRUCTION (QUEENS AREAS 1 – 8, 10 & 11)

MTA/LIRR EAST SIDE ACCESS PROJECT

SCOPE OF WORK

March 10, 2004

INTRODUCTION

The East Side Access Project will provide new LIRR service to Grand Central Terminal by connecting the Port Washington Branch and Main Line tracks adjacent to the Sunnyside Yard in Queens to the lower level of the existing 63rd Street Tunnel beneath the East River, and continuing in a new tunnel to Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project were assessed in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the project, and included an evaluation of the project’s potential effects on historic and archaeological resources. The Final EIS (FEIS) for the project was published in March 2001.

As part of the EIS process, a Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment was completed by Historical Perspectives, Inc. (HPI), in 1999 (and summarized in the FEIS). That analysis concluded that there may be archaeologically sensitive areas within Sunnyside Yard, Yard A, the stretch of railroad tracks in the Sunnyside area known as Harold Interlocking, and surrounding areas where construction of the project is proposed. Potential resource types identified range from precontact resources, to 17th through 19th century historical resources. These potential resources would be expected to be buried in the lower levels of and beneath late 19th and early 20th century fill which was deposited across the Sunnyside rail complex (including Yard A, Sunnyside Yard, and Harold Interlocking) when it was developed as a rail facility.

Under Section 106, a Programmatic Agreement was executed for the East Side Access Project by the Federal Transit Administration, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The Programmatic Agreement and the Final EIS set forth the following steps to be followed as the project design progressed:

Review of boring logs to better delineate filling and grading and refine conclusions regarding areas of potential archaeological sensitivity;

Review of ongoing design to refine areas of impact; and

For all areas that will be affected by project activities and that are considered to have potential archaeological sensitivity after review of available boring logs, further investigation and implementation of mitigation measures as appropriate.


Appendix D

Since completion of the Programmatic Agreement and FEIS for East Side Access, additional borings have been taken and reviewed in areas initially considered to have potential archaeological sensitivity. In addition, project designs to date have been reviewed to refine areas where the project would result in disturbance of soils. Stage 1B archaeological investigations have then been proposed for all areas determined to possess archaeological sensitivity as a result of those steps.

The plan for Stage 1B archaeological investigations presented in this report accounts for the complex character of the project area, including issues of contamination due to the Sunnyside rail complex’s century of use as a rail yard and its continued use as a major transportation hub. The following document sets forth a plan for Stage 1B archaeological investigations consisting of archaeological field monitoring during construction, and describes additional mitigation measures that could be undertaken should archaeological resources be encountered during the archaeological investigations.

Monitoring during construction, described in greater detail below, is proposed for ten of the 11 areas that have been identified as possessing potential archaeological sensitivity. These archaeologically sensitive areas are shown in Table 1 and Figure D-1 (which present areas of archaeological sensitivity and potential project effects) and consist of Areas 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11.

Stage 1B archaeological investigations in advance of construction are proposed for the one remaining archaeologically sensitive area, Area 12. Area 12 is located east of 43rd Street and consists of two discrete areas north and south of the LIRR Main Line. This potentially sensitive area is located outside the railroad right-of-way and does not require extensive remediation for hazardous materials, allowing for archaeological investigations to precede project construction. The Stage 1B investigations for this site is presented in a separate protocol.

Since construction of the project would be phased in different contracts with the potential for some potential archaeological resources to be affected by project construction before others (see Table 1 and Figure D-1), the proposed field investigation measures described in this report are presented in order of construction contract and anticipated project schedule. Contracts that do not have the potential to affect archaeological resources are not described. The first construction contract for the project, CQ025, has been completed, as described below. The subsequent contracts that have the potential to affect archaeological resources are then presented.

The first construction contract for the project, CQ025, has been completed. Construction under this contract included site preparatory work, including the demolition of a warehouse complex between Northern Boulevard and Yard A within Area 1. This entailed the removal of the superstructures and foundations of the buildings on the site. The demolition activities occurred within the modern fill overlaying the site; they did not extend to the depth of potential resources on the site, estimated to be present commencing at elevation 300’).

Also as part of Contract CQ025, a vehicular access ramp was constructed from Dutch Kills Street into Yard A within potentially sensitive Area 2. However, the construction of this ramp involved only surface work such as the replacement of pavement which did not extend to the depth of potential precontact archaeological resources estimated below the approximately four to


Appendix D

Figure D-1a Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside Queens Rail Complex, Field Monitoring During

Construction (Queens Areas 1-8, 10 & 11) – Page 1 of 2


Appendix D

Figure D-1a Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Sunnyside Queens Rail Complex, Field Monitoring During Construction (Queens Areas 1-8, 10 & 11) – Page 2 of 2


Appendix D

eight feet of fill at approximately elevation 308’ to 303’). Yard A was cleared of track and ballast so that it may also be used as a construction staging area and launch pad for the soft-ground tunnels. This occurred within sensitive Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 and also involved only

surface work that did not have the potential to affect buried archaeological resources.

The following future contracts have the potential to affect archaeological resources. They are described in detail later in this protocol.

Construction Contract CQ028: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 1 and 10. Contract is expected to be awarded in April 2004.

Construction Contract CQ040: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 4 and 5. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2004.

Construction Contract CQ031: Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 4 and 5. No longer affects potentially sensitive Area 11. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2005.

Construction Contract CQ041: Archaeological investigations pending (described below). Contract is expected to be awarded in 2005.

Construction Contract CH053: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 11 and 12. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2005.

Construction Contract CH054: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 6, 11, and 12. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2005.

Construction Contract CH060: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 6 and 8. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2007.

Construction Contract CQ033: Affects potentially sensitive Areas 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2007.

Construction Contract CQ034: Affects potentially sensitive Area 6. Contract is expected to be awarded in 2009.

Of these contracts, Contracts CH054, CH060 and CQ033 would involve construction in Yard A and in Sunnyside Yard in areas not previously assessed in the project’s 1999 Stage 1A. These areas are located west of Thomson Avenue. An additional contract, CQ041, which would be awarded in 2005, would involve cut and cover excavation in the area between the loop track and 43rd Street, north of the LIRR Main Line. This area was also not assessed in the project’s Stage 1A. Therefore, HPI is undertaking an archaeological evaluation of these areas as an addendum to the Stage 1A, Should any areas of archaeological sensitivity be identified, appropriate Stage 1B investigations would be developed in consultation with SHPO.

REVIEW OF BORING LOGS AND SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY

The Stage 1A, FEIS, and Programmatic Agreement called for additional borings to be taken within sensitive areas that could be affected by project construction prior to the undertaking of any subsurface archaeological evaluations, and that those boring logs be provided to a professional archaeologist for an evaluation of subsurface conditions so that, if possible, the locations and potential depths of potential archaeological resources could be further clarified and refined.


Appendix D

Since completion of the FEIS, HPI has reviewed boring logs prepared for the project. The results of the boring log review (summarized in addenda to the Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment dated February 28, 2000, March 24, 2000, May 4, 2001, and February 15, 2003) resulted in the adjustment of some conclusions regarding archaeological sensitivity presented in the Stage 1A. Specifically, portions of one potentially sensitive area, designated as Area 12 on Figure 19 of the Stage 1A, were found not to be sensitive based on information in the boring logs that indicated extensive disturbance had occurred. This disturbance eliminated the potential for undisturbed historic-period archaeological resources related to Revolutionary War British and Hessian troops to be present in some places. The areas of potential sensitivity removed were at 43rd Street [former Laurel Hill Avenue] and along the northern edge of the present LIRR viaduct, east of 43rd Street. Furthermore, the potentially sensitive area designated as Area 9 on Figure 19 of the Stage 1A was also eliminated due to evidence that five to ten feet of the original surface had been removed. Because the mid-19th to early 20th century historical archaeological resources in this area were expected to be shallow (e.g., less than five feet below original grade), the grading would have removed any archaeological sensitive strata. Therefore, Area 9 has been removed from consideration as an area of potential archaeological sensitivity.

In other areas, boring log review resulted in adjustments to conclusions regarding fill layers. In yet other areas, boring log review either served to support the Stage 1A conclusions, or the boring logs did not provide sufficient data to alter the original conclusions.

Figure D-1 shows the areas still considered to have potential archaeological sensitivity, following the review of the boring logs.

Additional geotechnical borings are proposed in the Sunnyside Yard area prior to project construction. MTA will consult with a professional archaeologist prior to the undertaking of any such borings so that the boring logs may be prepared in such a fashion as to enable the archaeologist to make assessments regarding subsurface conditions and prior disturbance. Depth and composition of any fill will be recorded, obstructions noted, and the composition of any original soils described, including the presence of a peat lens, an indicator of a buried shoreline and marker of potential precontact sensitivity.

ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT EFFECTS ON POTENTIALLY SENSITIVE AREAS

Since completion of the FEIS, the project’s designs have advanced. HPI has met with project engineers regarding proposed project elements and construction, to refine the conclusions related to the project’s effects on potentially sensitive areas, as appropriate. The location and depth of proposed project elements has been further clarified, and in some cases, this has also resulted in adjustments to the Stage 1A conclusions. Specifically, a portion of the area designated as Area 11 on Figure 19 of the Stage 1A (see Figure D-1), located within the area of the loop track, has been removed. This area had been previously excavated for construction of Sunnyside Yard and any intact archaeological resources would have been removed at this time. In addition, as described above, new archaeological evaluations are being undertaken for areas not previously assessed in the 1999 Stage 1A , including areas west of Thomson Avenue and in the area between the loop track and 43rd Street north of the LIRR Main Line.


Appendix D

Table 1 presents the revised conclusions about sensitivity and potential project effects for those areas that have assessed in the Stage 1A, incorporating the results of the review of boring logs and the latest information on project design. Areas of archaeological sensitivity are presented in Figure D-1. This table reflects proposed effects with only approximately 60% of the design plan completed (December 16, 2003).

The next scheduled contract that has the potential to affect archaeological resources is Construction Contract CQ028. For this contract, which will require cut-and-cover tunnel construction to bring the new tunnel to the surface of Yard A, the extent and area of proposed disturbance is known. The area of the proposed cut and cover tunnel construction extends from Northern Boulevard, through to Yard A. Construction of this segment is expected to commence in 2004. A subsequent contract, CQ031, to be awarded in 2005, would continue the open cut southward into Sunnyside Yard, following the demolition of two Amtrak buildings which would occur as part of Contract CQ040, described below.

For other areas, project design is ongoing, and therefore information on the specific location and depth of project disturbance is still being developed. Construction of the project in the Sunnyside rail complex (Yard A and the Harold Interlocking) will proceed in subsequent construction contracts, and therefore conclusions regarding archaeological sensitivity and potential project effects will continue to be subject to change as project engineering proceeds and construction effects are better defined. Project effects on potential archaeological resources will be re-evaluated later, when project design has advanced.

PROPOSED STAGE 1B FIELD INVESTIGATION MEASURES

As described above, the protocol for Stage 1B archaeological investigations set forth in this document takes into account issues of contamination and the continued and active use of the Sunnyside rail complex by the Long Island Rail Road, Amtrak, and New Jersey Transit.

The Sunnyside rail complex is listed by NYSDEC as a Class II Inactive Hazardous Waste Site. The primary concern regarding contaminated materials for the project is the presence of contaminated groundwater throughout the Sunnyside rail complex that could be encountered directly through project construction or through dewatering. Groundwater contaminants include chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs), a large plume of free-floating PCB-contaminated oil, and a plume of BTEX (four chemicals associated with gasoline) that extends into Yard A. Specifically complicating archaeological investigations is the shallowness of the water table; groundwater throughout the rail complex is located at an average of two to five feet below the surface. The Sunnyside rail complex is also an extremely active urban transportation hub, with some areas of archaeological sensitivity located within active railroad right-of-ways.


Appendix D

Table 1 – Areas of Archaeological Sensitivity and Potential Project Effects

Map Ref.

Area of Sensitivity Potential Resource Type Approximate Elevation Resource May be

Encountered

Proposed Construction (60 % design plan)

Precontact Resources Below approximately 4-20 feet of fill. Resources potentially at elevations of 300-288 feet (based on soil boring profiles prepared for Contract CQ028)

1

Area between Northern Blvd. & Yard A (Block 239, Lots 35 & 48)

Historic period resources: mid 19th century Payntar Homestead

In the lowest levels and beneath approximately 4 to 20 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area ranges from elevations of 310-305 feet at Northern Blvd to 299-297 feet near Yard A

Contract CQ028: Cut and cover tunnel excavation. CQ033: Construction of Yard Services Building/Vent Structure

2

Northern edge of Yard A Precontact resources Below approximately 4 to 8 feet of fill . Resources potentially at elevations of 307-293 feet.

Contract CQ033: Construction in Yard A for new storage yard facility and construction of new yard systems including lighting and power

3

Northern edge of Yard A Precontact resources Below approx. 4-8 feet of fill between Thomson Ave & Queens Blvd. near 41st Ave. Resources potentially at elevations of 307-293 feet.

Contract CQ033: Yard A storage yard facility

4, 5

Area in Yard A extending southwest from old LIRR trackbed to proposed tunnel alignment

Precontact resources Below approximately 8-13 feet of fill. Resources in Area 4 potentially at elevations of 303-288 feet. Resources in Area 5 potentially at elevations of 306-289 feet in Yard A and 306 to 296 in the area of Amtrak bldgs 3 & 4.

Contract CQ033. Contract CQ040: Demolish Amtrak buildings and utility relocation. Contract CQ31: extension of tunnel open cut into Sunnyside Yard

Precontact resources Below approximately 2-17.5 feet of fill. Resources potentially at elevations of 317-307 feet on the rail embankments and 313-303 feet in Yard A.

6

Area near Queens Boulevard

Historic period resources: 19th-early 20th century residential lot features (e.g., shafts from privies, cisterns, and wells)

In the lowest levels and beneath approximately 2-17.5 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area ranges from an elevation of 317 feet on the rail embankments to one of 313 feet in Yard A.

Contracts CH054 and CH060 : Harold Interlocking Reconfiguration. Contract CQ034: new Sunnyside Station

7 Triangular area of tracks bounded by north edge of Yard A, Dutch Kills St. and Thomson Ave.

Historic period resources: late 19th-early 20th cent. Residential lot features (e.g., shafts from privies, cisterns, and wells)

In the lowest levels and below approximately 3.5 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area is

Contract CQ033


Appendix D

Bridge approximated at an elevation of 308 feet.

8

Area adjacent to and east of Dutch Kills St. and the Thomson Ave Bridge

Historic period resources: late 19th-early 20th cent. residential lot features (e.g., shafts from privies, cisterns, and wells)

In the lowest levels and below approximately 3.5 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area is approximated at an elevation of 308 feet.

Contracts CQ033 and CH060

Note: As described above under “Review of Boring Logs and Summary of Archaeological Sensitivity, Area 9 has been removed from consideration as an area of potential archaeological sensitivity.

Precontact Resources Below approx. 11-17 feet of fill. Resources potentially at approximately at elevations of 297-288 feet

10

Northern edge of Yard A

Historic period resources: ca.1650 grist mill between 41st Ave. and 40th Road

In the lowest levels and beneath approx. 11-17 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area is approximated at an elevation of 297 feet.

Contracts CQ028 and CQ033

11

L-shaped area adjacent to western end of loop track

Historic period resources: British & Hessian Revolutionary War troop occupation

In and below fill. Some areas may have up to 6.75’ of surface removed, others up to 14’ of fill added. The top of the sensitive area is approximated at an elevation of 346 feet.

Contracts CH053 and CH054: Harold Interlocking Reconfiguration

12

Portions of the area bounded by 43rd and 46th Sts, and 37th and Barnett Avenues

Historic period resources: British & Hessian Revolutionary War troop occupation

In the lowest levels and below approximately 10 –20 feet of fill. The top of the sensitive area is approximated at an elevation of 340 feet.

Contracts CH053 and CH054

Notes: • Testing in advance of construction is proposed in Area 12. The proposed testing plan for this area is presented in a

separate testing protocol. • Except for Contract CQ028, which affects Areas 1 and 10, the estimated depth of potential archaeological sensitivity is

based on geotechnical information contained in early design submittal packages (pre-50% design completion), and is expected to be refined as engineering proceeds and additional geotechnical information is compiled. Since much of the potentially affected area was formerly an alluvial area (a marsh), the area of potential precontact sensitivity has been approximated to extend for a depth of 10 feet (except Areas 1 and 10 where current geotechnical profiles based on boring logs taken in preparation for Contract CQ028 were reviewed).

Due to the presence of shallow contaminated ground water which would require hazardous materials remediation measures during construction of the project and because of the active use of the rail complex by the commuter railroads, the Stage 1B archaeological field investigations proposed for the areas of sensitivity within the Sunnyside rail complex consist of archaeological field monitoring during project construction. Advance archaeological field testing has been proposed for one area (Area 12) outside of the Sunnyside rail complex where contamination and interference with railroad operations are not an issue. As described above, a field testing protocol for Area 12 is contained in a separate document.


Appendix D

Based on the current findings, and with construction of the proposed cut and cover tunnel segment (CQ028) imminent, Stage 1B field investigations are proposed in Yard A where the excavation will occur as part of Contract CQ028. In addition, field investigations for other archaeologically sensitive areas in the Sunnyside rail complex are also proposed, although the locations and extent of any field testing is subject to change should further design work change the conclusions about the project’s effects in these areas.

Stage 1B fieldwork, the testing phase of a standard survey, is designed to ascertain the presence/absence, type, and extent of archaeological resources on a site. It is not a full-scale excavation. Consistent with the project’s Programmatic Agreement, this work will be done in consultation with the SHPO.

The following pages contain a proposed scope of work for Stage 1B archaeological investigations organized by construction contract. The provision for additional associated laboratory work, written reports, and further documentary research if necessary is also described. Due to presence of shallow contaminated groundwater throughout the Sunnyside rail complex and safety and operation issues pertaining to archaeological investigations within active railroad right-of-ways, proposed Stage 1B investigations in the Sunnyside rail complex in sensitive areas 1-11 (see Figure D-1) affected by construction contracts CQ028, CQ040, CQ031, CH053, CH054, CQ033, CH060, and CQ034, consist of monitoring at the time of construction. Field testing prior to construction of the portions of Contracts CH053 and CH054 east of 43rd Street are proposed for sensitive area 12, since this area neither contains contaminated ground water nor is located within an active railroad right-of-way. The information for Areas 1 through 11 is presented in greater detail below.

It is entirely possible that the Stage 1B investigations will not reveal any precontact or historical features or deposits. If that is the case, there would be no further archaeological consideration warranted, and a report to that effect would be prepared for the review agency. However, if National Register eligible resources are identified during testing, SHPO must be consulted before further action, such as mitigation, is undertaken.

The objective of the field investigation is to ascertain the presence/absence of precontact and historical archaeological deposits and possible buried features in the lower levels of and beneath the landfill overburden. Field investigations will be restricted to the areas shown as potentially sensitive in Figure D-1 and where project effects are anticipated (see Table 1). The field testing protocol recommended and described below for this extremely active urban transportation hub is multi-faceted due to the issues described above.

Prior to the initiation of field testing, a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) will be developed for the archaeologists working on the site, and will be approved by the MTA prior to the undertaking of any archaeological field investigations. All safety regulations regarding monitoring and any hand tests in trenches will be observed. MTA requirements for rail-safety training will also be met.

Construction Contract CQ028 – Cut and Cover Tunnel Excavation (Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 1 and 10, see Figure 1) and Construction Contract CQ040 – Demolition of Amtrak Buildings 3 and 4 and utility relocation (Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 4 and 5, see Figure D-1)


Appendix D

Construction Contract CQ028 calls for the construction of a new cut and cover tunnel to be constructed from New York City Transit’s existing 63rd Street Tunnel Connector project site north of Northern Boulevard, beneath Northern Boulevard through to Yard A. A subsequent construction contract, CQ031, would continue the open cut to Sunnyside Yard (discussed below in “Construction Contract CQ031 – Extension of Yard A Open Cut and Amtrak Loop Track Reconstruction”). The final cut and cover structure will be approximately 800 feet long. There it would connect to the proposed new soft-ground bored tunnels which are part of a separate contract, and, due to their projected depth, do not have the potential to affect archaeological resources. Contract CQ028 is expected to be awarded in April 2004. A concurrent contract to also be awarded at the end of that same year, Construction Contract CQ040, would entail the demolition of two Amtrak buildings (known as buildings 3 and 4) and would also involve utility relocation. This work would affect potentially sensitive areas 4 and 5.

The cut-and-cover tunnel excavations will pass through two areas of potential archaeological sensitivity designated as Areas 1 and 10 on Figure D-1. As Table 1 denotes, Area 1 is sensitive for potential precontact resources and historic period resources relating to the mid-19th century Payntar homestead. Area 10 is potentially sensitive for precontact resources and historical period resources relating to the ca. 1650 grist mill between 41st Avenue and the Honeywell Street Bridge.

The new tunnel cut-and-cover excavations will be in an area that contains groundwater contaminated with chlorinated volatile organic compounds (VOCs). In this area, infiltration of groundwater and the need for dewatering will be limited through the construction of a slurry wall around the excavation area prior to any excavations. A slurry wall is a concrete wall that runs from ground level to bedrock. (“Slurry” is a clay-water mixture that is pumped into a narrow excavation area to form two- to three-foot-wide temporary walls that keep the sides intact until the concrete is poured.) The slurry wall will serve as a retaining wall around the excavation area and will prevent groundwater from entering into the excavation. This excavation area will extend from Northern Boulevard across Yard A to the edge of Sunnyside Yard. This excavation area will provide a critical starting point for the project’s tunnel excavation. Proposed slurry walls must be in place prior to any archaeological investigation where contamination levels demand their use, to ensure that contaminated water does not become concentrated in the excavation area. Fill in this area is anywhere from four to 20 feet in depth and must be removed by excavation equipment. Because the feasibility of testing this area is complicated by the presence of deep fill, hazardous material, and the need to install a slurry wall, HPI recommends monitoring during construction for potential resources after the slurry walls are installed as described below. HPI also recommends monitoring during demolition of the Amtrak buildings and during any utility work that may extend beneath the fill in sensitive Areas 4 and 5. As described above, these areas also contain contaminated groundwater. As per the Draft Guidelines for the Use of Archaeological Monitoring as an Alternative to Other Field Techniques put forth by the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC), monitoring is the observation of construction excavation activities by an archaeologist in order to identify, recover, protect and/or document archaeological information or materials (March 25, 2002:1).

The monitoring plan for the areas of proposed work will be implemented subject to approval by the SHPO. The first step of the plan will include cultural resource awareness training for the


Appendix D

construction management team prior to excavations. A specific chain of notification will be established prior to any archaeological monitoring activities and is described below.

After the slurry wall is constructed, cut-and-cover project excavations associated with Construction Contract CQ028 will commence. At this time, an archaeologist will be on-site to monitor the removal of fill from the area of potential effect to ensure that excavations do not accidentally intrude into potentially sensitive levels. This is also the case where work associated with Construction Contract CQ040 would extend below the fill. The archaeologists will begin monitoring the removal of the fill commencing at the point where borings/soil profiles indicate that excavation is within five feet of the natural ground surface, estimated at an elevation of 305 feet. Borings indicate the natural ground surface consists of organic silts and clays. A layer of organic silts and clays of approximately 10 feet in depth is located in the southern portion of Area 1 at elevations ranging from 300 to 288 feet and within Area 10 at elevations ranging from 297 to 288 feet (see Table 1). When the organic silts and clays layer is reached, the contractor will begin soil removal in 1’-0” lifts using a flat blade excavator under the direction of the archaeologist. The archaeologists will cease monitoring activities when the archaeologists determine that glacial, or sterile soils are encountered. Where there is no organic silts and clays layer and fill directly overlays mixed glacial deposits, the archaeologists will monitor the removal of fill commencing at five feet above of the mixed glacial deposits, at a point also estimated at an elevation of 305 feet. This will enable the archaeologist to determine if there may be any historic-period shaft features which may extend into the sterile soils. Archaeologists will be given the authority to temporarily halt construction into natural soils to ensure that potential resources are not disturbed, and this will be conveyed to all levels of contractors on the site excavation team, including equipment operators. If excavations are halted by the archaeologist, time will then be given to investigate subsurface conditions, as needed. This period of time should be for a minimum of at least one hour for every 30 linear feet of trench after the fill is removed.

In the event that archaeological deposits are encountered, archaeologists will be permitted to halt excavations for a period of up to 24 hours to allow time for photography, drawing of profiles, screening of removed soil for artifacts, removal of soil samples, hand excavation, and any other actions deemed necessary to determine the nature, extent, and potential significance of the discovery. If the resources encountered do not appear significant and do not appear to meet criteria for listing on the National Register (NR), the on-site professional archaeologist will notify the appropriate construction personnel, and construction may resume. If resources are encountered that are determined by the on-site professional archaeologist to be potentially significant, e.g. appearing to meet eligibility criteria for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NR-eligible), the construction team, engineering team, and SHPO will be immediately notified according to the following sequence. An environmental coordinator, a member of the on-site construction team to be named, will be designated as the on-site contact person. The archaeologist will be responsible for notifying the environmental coordinator of any potentially significant finds, and he/she in turn will be responsible for notifying the point of contact at the MTA. The MTA will then be responsible for notifying SHPO of the find. SHPO will be consulted regarding the potential significance of the find, i.e., whether SHPO determines it meets or does not meet NR eligibility criteria. Designated contacts for this chain of command are as follows:


Appendix D

CONTACT INFORMATION:

On-Site Geotechnical/Environmental Coordinator:

Robert Gould MTA/LIRR East Side Access Project 29-76 Northern Boulevard, Fifth floor Long Island City, NY 11101 Tel: 718-391-4718 Fax: 718-391-4705

Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Capital Construction Resident Engineer:

Ihab Shafei, PE MTA/LIRR East Side Access Project 29-76 Northern Boulevard, Fifth floor Long Island City, NY 11101 Tel: 718-391-4719 Fax: 718-391-4705

State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO): Robert Kuhn State Historic Preservation Office Peebles Island, PO Box 189 Waterford, NY 12188-0189 Tel: 518-237-8643 x 3255 Fax: 518-233-9049

After these parties have been consulted regarding the presence of potentially significant resources, and if the SHPO determines that the resource(s) are NR-eligible, the archaeologists will be given an agreed upon amount of time to properly recover the resource(s) through a Data Recovery Plan. The period of time allowed for these actions will be dependent on the size and location of the resource, and will be determined in the field by the archaeologist and the consulting parties. The period of time to complete this will be no less than two days per resource identified, if needed, and may extend to up to five days if indicated. The construction team will cease excavations in the potentially sensitive area while archaeologists recover the resource. However, excavations may continue in another part of the site simultaneously, provided that they would have no harmful effects on the data recovery efforts, and will continue to be monitored by an archaeologist. The objective of the archaeologists would be to remove and record potential features or deposits. The NYAC standards for excavation, screening, recording of features and stratigraphy, labeling, mapping, photographing, and cataloging will be applied.

During all excavations, assistance will be provided to the archaeological team by the construction personnel, if needed. This could include, but would not be limited to, pumping water from excavation areas, shoring trenches, meeting all OSHA regulations, and machine excavating non-sensitive levels to further reveal the resource(s).

It is not anticipated that additional documentary research will be necessary but if intact historical resources are encountered, additional documentary research may be necessary in order to further understand the potential significance of deposits.


Appendix D

Construction Contract CQ031 – Extension of Yard A Open Cut and Amtrak Loop Track Reconstruction (Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 4 and 5)

Construction Contract CQ031 includes the extension of the open cut for the cut and cover tunnel into Sunnyside Yard as well as construction of an additional loop track within Sunnyside Yard. Construction of Contract CQ031 is expected to begin in 2005.

As described under Construction Contract CQ028, a cut and cover tunnel would be built from New York City Transit’s existing 63rd Street Tunnel Connector project site north of Northern Boulevard, beneath Northern Boulevard, through to Yard A. Contract CQ031 would continue the open cut from Yard A into Sunnyside Yard where it would then connect to the new soft-ground bored tunnels. This work would follow the completion of the demolition of Amtrak buildings 3 and 4 (Contract CQ040, described above), located in Sunnyside Yard near the boundary with Yard A.

The continuation of the open cut into Sunnyside Yard would affect sensitive areas 4 and 5, which are potentially sensitive for precontact resources. There are existing utilities and drainage features within these sensitive areas. It is assumed that the installation of these features may have disturbed potential resources in discrete locations. Areas 4 and 5 have had drainage tiles installed, but these are only about four to five feet below grade, and lie in fill levels which extend eight to 13 feet below grade. Where a culvert and combined sewer were installed, deep support piles may have extended into the deeper potentially sensitive levels. A 42” storm sewer may have also caused disturbance along its route if it was installed more than eight feet below grade.

Similar work described above for Contract CQ028 would be required to complete the open cut, including the construction of slurry walls which will serve to prevent contaminated ground water from entering the area of excavation. Since the proposed slurry walls must be in place prior to any archaeological investigations, monitoring during construction for potential precontact resources in Areas 4 and 5, after the slurry walls are installed is proposed as outlined for “Construction Contract CQ028 – Cut and Cover Excavation.”

Contract CQ031 also includes reconstruction of the loop track. Subsequent to the FEIS, the project’s design of the loop track that will lead from the Harold Interlocking to Yard A has been changed. Sunnyside Yard currently operates with three loop tracks. The FEIS considered a layout with one additional loop track, to be added on the property owned by Amtrak, inside the other three tracks. This would have required construction of a tunnel to allow the loop track to pass beneath the mainline tracks and would have affected Area 11. Based on additional engineering design and feasibility analysis, the project is now planning to construct a new soft-ground bored tunnel for an additional loop track outside the other loop tracks east of Area 11. Therefore, the loop track construction would have no adverse effect on potential archaeological resources and no further archaeological consideration for this project element is warranted.

Construction Contract CQ041 – Demolition of Buildings for “Daylighting” of New Loop Track (Requires Archaeological Evaluation)

The new loop track tunnel described above under Contract CQ031would come to grade in Sunnyside Yard between the loop track and 43rd Street, north of the LIRR Main Line. This work


Appendix D

would require the demolition of several warehouses. Construction Contract CQ041 is expected to be awarded in 2005.

At this time, an archaeological assessment for the potentially affected area is being undertaken by HPI. Once that assessment is complete, its conclusions and recommendations will be summarized as an addendum to the project’s Stage 1A. Should the assessment identify the potential for archaeological resources, an appropriate Stage 1B protocol would be developed in consultation with SHPO to evaluate the absence and/or potential and significance of any potential resources.

Construction Contracts CH053, CH054, and CH060 – Harold Interlocking Reconfiguration

Construction Contract CH053: Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 11and 12

Construction Contract CH054: Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 6, 11, and 12

Construction Contract CH060: Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 6 and 8

Harold Interlocking Reconfiguration Within the Sunnyside Rail Complex (between Thomson Avenue and 43rd Street). The 1.5-mile section of track and associated switches and crossovers between roughly Hunters Point Avenue and 43rd Street is known as the Harold Interlocking. This section of track is shared by LIRR, Amtrak, and NJ Transit, and used for access to and from the East River tunnels, Sunnyside Yard, LIRR’s Main Line and Port Washington Branch tracks, and Amtrak’s route through Queens to and from New England. The Harold Interlocking is densely developed with tracks, and the number and frequency of trains running through the interlocking make it very congested. The East Side Access Project will be constructing new tunnel portals in the interlocking, leading between the LIRR Main Line and the tunnels that will cross beneath Sunnyside Yard and Yard A. In addition, utilities will need to be relocated and the temporary relocation of the LIRR mainline tracks will be required to maintain rail operations through the Harold Interlocking during construction of bored tunnels and associated work elements. Several warehouse buildings (Matura Buildings) between the loop track and 43rd Street north of the LIRR Main Line would also be demolished. Work for Construction Contracts CH053, CH054, and CH060 would occur between Thomson Avenue and 43rd Street, affecting potentially sensitive areas 6, 8, and 11. Construction contracts CH053 and CH054 are expected to be awarded in 2005, with Construction Contract CH060 awarded in 2007. Work for Construction Contracts CH053, CH054 would also occur east of 43rd Street, affecting potentially sensitive Area 12. This work and testing measures proposed in advance of construction for Area 12 are described in a separate testing protocol.

The Harold Interlocking work could potentially affect resources within the existing railroad embankments in Areas 6, 8 and 11, including the construction of a retaining wall along Skillman Avenue that would affect Area 6. Area 6 was identified as potentially sensitive for precontact resources and historic-period resources including 19th and early 20th century residential lot features, including potential privies, cisterns and wells, but may have groundwater that is contaminated with chlorinated VOCs concentrated in what is designated as the Central Yard Plume. Area 8 was identified as potentially sensitive for historic-period resources consisting of 19th and early 20th century residential lot features, which may include shafts such as privies,


Appendix D

cisterns and wells. Area 11 was identified as potentially sensitive for British and Hessian Revolutionary War troop occupation. Resource depths vary, but all are potentially in the lower levels of and beneath the fill. In Area 6, fill ranges between approximately 2 and 17.5 feet below grade. Approximately 3.5 feet of fill is estimated to be present within Area 8. The depth of fill is unknown in Area 11, but map research suggests that some sections of Area 11 may have had between six and seven feet of the original surface removed, while other sections may have had up to 14 feet of fill added.

Some prior disturbance has been noted for each of these areas. Utilities in the location of Area 6 that may have disturbed potential resources include a 42” storm sewer that may range in depth from five to eight feet in some locations, but may be deeper on the 20’ embankment within this area. Area 8 also contains a storm sewer that may have disturbed potential resources. Area 11 has experienced limited disturbance by the prior installation of an electrical line along the perimeter, which is estimated to be approximately five to six feet below grade.

Currently, the exact depth and locations of proposed project construction are unknown for this area, though it is anticipated that contract CH060 would include the construction of an approximately 22-foot-deep cross-connector tunnel that would pass beneath the LIRR Main Line. The tunnel would be built via cut-and-cover, with construction occurring within Area 6 and a small portion of Area 8. In addition, as described above, portions of Area 6 and 8 and all of Area 11 are located within the active trackbed of the Harold Interlocking. Because the Harold Interlocking is used by many trains during the day, construction work in this area must be carefully phased to avoid disruption to LIRR and Amtrak service. The East Side Access Project will first create temporary detour tracks, switches, and crossovers for use by trains in the area. After these temporary tracks are available, the tunnel elements of the East Side Access Project at Harold Interlocking will be constructed. Because of the tight timeframe for this construction work and the difficult working conditions, archaeological excavation prior to construction of the tunnel portals or new stations would be impractical. The presence of contaminated groundwater in Area 6 would add to the difficulties associated with any archaeological work. Since Stage 1B archaeological testing in advance of project construction is not feasible, it is recommended that once project effects have been better defined and the areas of sensitivity that would be affected by the proposed action are confirmed, monitoring at the time of construction should be considered. A monitoring plan, to be carried out as per the Draft Guidelines for the Use of Archaeological Monitoring as an Alternative to Other Field Techniques put forth by the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC) and as outlined for “Construction Contract CQ028 – Cut and Cover Tunnel Excavation,” would be adopted and employed for Areas 6, 8 and 11.

Construction Contract CQ033 –Construction of Mid-Day Storage Yard Facility in Yard A (Affects Potentially Sensitive Areas 2, 3, 4, 5,7, 8 and 10, see Figure D-1)

Following completion of the cut and cover work in Yard A, the yard will be developed as a new East Side Access train storage yard. This will involve grading, laying of new tracks, and potential placement of utilities and lighting. In addition, a new facility will be constructed for the washing of LIRR rail cars. Trenching to manholes, light pole foundations, and other site infrastructure may penetrate into groundwater, and therefore, limited dewatering would be required. The proposed trainwash facility, located approximately 30 feet from a contaminated water plume, would be built with shallow foundations so that excavation would not intercept the


Appendix D

water table. In addition, Construction Contract CQ033 includes the construction of two structures, a Yard Services Building and a Ventilation Plant, in the area formerly occupied by warehouses between Northern Boulevard and Yard A (Area 1) and in Yard A. Construction Contract CQ033 is expected to be awarded in 2007.

Detailed designs for this phase of work have not yet been fully developed, so the depth of disturbance remains preliminary. Construction in Yard A could potentially affect archaeologically sensitive Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10. Areas 2, 3, 4, and 5 are potentially sensitive for precontact resources; Areas 7 and 8 are potentially sensitive for historic-period resources from 19th and early 20th century residential lot features, which may include shaft features such as privies, cisterns, and wells; and Area 10 is potentially sensitive for precontact resources and historical period resources relating to the ca.1650 grist mill between 41st Avenue and the Honeywell Street Bridge.

There are existing utilities and drainage features within these sensitive areas, and it is assumed that the installation of these features may have disturbed potential resources in discrete locations in areas 4, 5, and 10 as described above under Construction Contract CQ028. Area 2 contains various utility lines to a depth of at least four to five feet below grade, and a storm sewer along its perimeter that ranges in depth from five to eight feet. It is possible that the installation of these utilities disturbed potentially sensitive areas. Similarly, Area 8 contains a storm sewer that may have also disturbed potential resources. In Area 3, a storm sewer runs along the perimeter of the sensitive area, which has probably caused effects about five to eight feet in depth along its alignment. However, fill in this area is reported to range between 11 and 17 feet below grade, so potentially sensitive levels beneath the fill may have been left undisturbed.

The sensitive areas contain groundwater contaminated with chlorinated VOCs and BTEX. Fill in these areas is anywhere from three to 18 feet in depth, with potential precontact resources in Areas 2, 3, 4, 5, and 10 anticipated beneath fill layers, and historic period resources in Areas 7, 8, and 10 anticipated in the lower levels of and beneath the fill.

As of the writing of this scope of work for field investigations, the depth and extent of proposed construction for Contract CQ033 is unknown. Therefore, it is recommended that once construction effects have been better defined, that the areas of sensitivity that may be affected by the proposed project be confirmed. It is expected that prior to any archaeological evaluations, the fill would need to be removed with excavation equipment. Because the feasibility of testing these areas is complicated by the presence of deep fill and contaminated groundwater, HPI recommends monitoring during construction. Monitoring and any subsequent required archaeological analyses would be carried out as per the Draft Guidelines for the Use of Archaeological Monitoring as an Alternative to Other Field Techniques put forth by the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC) and as described above for the “Construction Contract CQ028 – Cut and Cover Tunnel Excavation,” portion of the project.

Construction Contract CQ034 – Construction of Sunnyside Station (Affects Potentially Sensitive Area 6)


Appendix D

The project will construct a new Sunnyside Station along the Harold Interlocking, below and adjacent to the Queens Boulevard Bridge. The design of the new Sunnyside Station is still undergoing preliminary engineering, with initial plans calling for a main station area perpendicular to the Queens Boulevard Bridge and three platforms—two of approximately 1,000 feet in length (12-car capacity) and the center platform of approximately 680 feet in length (8-car capacity). It is also expected that the rerouting of trains would be required to allow for the construction of the new station. Contract CQ034 is expected to be awarded in 2009.

Construction of the new Sunnyside passenger station would affect Area 6. As described above under “Construction Contracts CH053, CH054, and CH060 – Harold Interlocking Reconfiguration,” Area 6 was identified as potentially sensitive for precontact resources and historic-period resources including 19th and early 20th century residential lot features, including potential privies, cisterns and wells, but may have groundwater that is contaminated with chlorinated VOCs. Potential resources would be anticipated in the lower levels of and beneath the fill, which ranges between approximately 2 and 17.5 feet below grade.

As described above, some prior disturbance may have occurred within this area of sensitivity, including include a 42” storm sewer that may range in depth from five to eight feet in some locations, but may be deeper on the 20’ embankment within this area.

As indicated above, the exact depth and locations of proposed project construction are unknown for this area. In addition, a portion of Area 6 is located within the active trackbed of the Harold Interlocking and Area 6 has been identified as containing contaminated groundwater. Therefore, due to these complications, it is recommended that once project effects have been better defined and the areas of sensitivity that would be affected by the proposed action are confirmed, monitoring at the time of construction be considered. A monitoring plan, as outlined for the “Construction Contract CQ028 – Cut and Cover Tunnel Excavation,” portion of the project, would be adopted and employed for Area 6.


Appendix E

APPENDIX E

Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites – East 50th Street & East 38th Street

* Investigation / Testing in Advance of Construction – East 38th Street * Field Monitoring/Testing during Construction – East 50th Street


Appendix E

STAGE 1B ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD TESTING PROTOCOL:

MANHATTAN SHAFT SITES – EAST 50th STREET & EAST 38th STREET

* INVESTIGATION / TESTING IN ADVANCE OF CONSTRUCTION – E 38th STREET

* FIELD MONITORING / TESTING DURING CONSTRUCTION – E 50th STREET

MTA/LIRR EAST SIDE ACCESS PROJECT

SCOPE OF WORK

March 10, 2004

INTRODUCTION

The East Side Access Project will provide new LIRR service to Grand Central Terminal by connecting the Port Washington Branch and Main Line tracks adjacent to the Sunnyside Yard in Queens to the lower level of the existing 63rd Street Tunnel beneath the East River, and continuing in a new tunnel to Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan. The potential environmental effects of the proposed project were assessed in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the project, and included an evaluation of the project’s potential effects on historic and archaeological resources. As part of the EIS process, a Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment was completed by Historical Perspectives, Inc. (HPI) in 1999, and was summarized in the EIS. The Final EIS (FEIS) for the project was published in March 2001.

Subsequent to the FEIS, project engineering has continued, and at this time, two new project elements are under consideration that were not assessed in the FEIS and that have the potential to affect archaeological resources through in-ground disturbance. These are the potential construction of ventilation facilities at sites between Park and Madison Avenues on East 50th and 38th Streets. Currently, these ventilation facilities would be constructed as part of Construction Contract CM013, which is scheduled to commence construction in Fall 2005. Accordingly, Areas of Potential Effect (APEs) for archaeological resources were defined and Stage 1A Archaeological Assessments prepared for these sites, assessing each site’s potential to contain potential archaeological resources and the project’s potential to affect such resources.1 The following pages briefly summarize the conclusions of the Stage 1A reports.

For the areas identified as possessing potential archaeological sensitivity, proposed Stage 1B archaeological investigations consist of testing during construction for the site at East 50th Street and testing in advance of construction for the site at East 38th Street. Additional evaluation and mitigation measures that could be undertaken should archaeological resources be encountered during the archaeological investigations are also described. .1 Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment, East 50th Street Vent Plant, MTA/LIRR East Side Access Project, prepared by Historical Perspectives, Inc., June 2003 and Stage 1A Archaeological Assessment, East Side Access Ventilation Shaft, 38th Street, New York City, New York, prepared by URS Corporation, January 2004.


Appendix E

SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY

EAST 50th STREET SHAFT SITE

(Block 1285, Lots 43, 44, 45, 46, and portion of East 50th Street)

HPI’s Stage 1A study of the 50th Street vent plant site concluded that there is the possibility that historic shaft features, such as wells, cisterns, and possibly privies, associated with early to mid-19th century structures that were part of the Institute for the Deaf and Dumb may still be present on the site. Potentially sensitive areas were identified in the existing open backyards of Lots 43 and 46, and under structures that lack basements in the rear of Lots 45 and 46. The specific areas of potential historic archaeological sensitivity are as follows (see attached Figure E-1):

Lot 43, back of lot only. Possible subsurface shaft features of early to mid-19th century structures associated with the Institute for the Deaf and Dumb located along the east side of the back of the lot.

Lot 45, back of lot only, beneath one-story addition with no basement. Possible early to mid-19th century subsurface shaft features associated with the Deaf and Dumb Institute. Subsurface impacts by the east wing of the Deaf and Dumb Institute and Columbia College Library would have disturbed any potential resources in those portions of the rear of the lot. A possible pedestrian tunnel may have further impacted the back of the lot. Therefore, only a small section between the back of the former east wing of the Institute and the former Library remains sensitive.

Lot 46, toward back of lot where there was once open yard space but is now occupied by a one-story addition with no basement. Possible early to mid-19th century subsurface shaft features associated with the Deaf and Dumb Institute. Subsurface impacts by the Columbia College Library in the late 19th century would have disturbed the extreme back end of the lot.

As part of the Stage 1A study, HPI reviewed boring logs for geotechnical borings which had been taken in the East 50th Street roadbed. Additional borings are proposed in East 50th Street, but not within Lots 43-46, as they are presently occupied by buildings. Therefore, it is not possible for additional borings to be undertaken prior to project construction within the sensitive areas to further clarify subsurface conditions and, therefore, the Stage 1B protocol described below has been prepared.

EAST 38th STREET SHAFT SITE

(Block 868, Lot 53)

The Stage 1A assessment prepared by URS Corporation (URS) for the East 38th Street shaft site concluded that the project site may contain undisturbed resources associated with 19th-century domestic deposits. The sensitive area consists of the rear portion of the lot, which was the location of back yards associated with a house that dates to 1846 - 1852 and a rowhouse that dates to circa 1861. This portion of the lot appears to have been undeveloped up to the present (see attached Figure E-1).


Appendix E

Figure E-1 Stage 1B Archaeological Field Testing Protocol: Manhattan Shaft Sites - East 50th Street and 38th Street


Appendix E

The historical background research indicated that the rear portion of the project site once served as a back yard area for two houses. The first was constructed sometime between 1846 and 1852. It was razed in 1860 and replaced by a four-story row house with a basement in 1861. It appears that the back yard remained relatively undeveloped and intact until 1931 when it was turned into a parking lot and has served the same function up to the present. Therefore, there is a high potential for a variety of features associated with the domestic occupation of the site beneath the parking lot. These include deep shafts (privies, wells, and cisterns), fence posts, paths, traces of landscaping and sheet midden (yard trash) scatter.

At the time of URS’s preparation of the Stage 1A study, no project borings had been taken on the proposed shaft site. Since the proposed site is a surface parking lot, the project will be undertaking a geotechnical boring program on the site once access has been gained. The boring program will be undertaken in coordination with a professional archaeologist, as described below under “Proposed Stage 1B Investigation Measures.”

PROPOSED STAGE 1B INVESTIGATION MEASURES

The following testing protocol describes the tasks to be performed for the archaeologically sensitive areas identified in the Stage 1A studies and described above. The proposed work will be conducted in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s “Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties” (36 CFR 800). The investigation will also be conducted pursuant to SHPO guidelines for such projects (New York Archaeological Council [NYAC 1994]). The cultural resources specialists who will perform this work will satisfy the qualifications specified in 36 CFR 61, Appendix A. The Principal Investigators for the Stage 1B investigations will be archaeologists certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA).

Stage 1B fieldwork, the testing phase of a standard survey, is designed to ascertain the presence/absence, type and extent of archaeological resources on a site. Its ultimate goal is to determine whether significant (i.e., National Register eligible) resources that could be adversely affected by project construction are extant within the East 50th Street and East 38th Street site APEs.

The following document sets forth a plan for Stage 1B archaeological investigations for each site, including research issues to be addressed and proposed fieldwork activities. For both sites, the following pages also describe additional mitigation measures that would be undertaken should archaeological resources be encountered during the archaeological investigations, including artifact analysis such as laboratory work, written reports, and further documentary research if necessary.

RESEARCH ISSUES

Historical archaeological resources relating to institutions and residences are often preserved in privies, cisterns or wells, which in the days before the construction of municipal services — namely sewers and a public water supply — were an inevitable part of daily life. When rendered obsolete, these shafts became convenient receptacles for all sorts of trash, providing a valuable


Appendix E


time capsule of stratified deposits for the modern archaeologist. They frequently provide the best remains recovered on urban sites. Truncated portions of these deep shaft features are often encountered on lots with historical occupancy because the shafts’ deeper and therefore earlier layers remain undisturbed by subsequent construction. Prior studies in the region have demonstrated that deep shafts are generally located within a few feet of the rear lot boundary. As described above, portions of both the East 50th Street and East 38th Street project sites are sensitive for these rear yard features.

Other commonly occurring, but much more shallowly buried historical remains include foundations and builder’s trenches, which, if a structure did not contain a basement, would extend only a few feet below the pre–development land surface. Even more fragile backyard remains such as fence lines, paths, traces of landscaping and sheet midden scatter can provide valuable data to the archaeologist, but are frequently disturbed in urban settings. As described above, the rear portion of the East 38th Street shaft site is sensitive for these types of features.

If undisturbed deposits of cultural material from the early 19th century institutional use of the East 50th Street site do still exist, they may have the potential to provide meaningful information regarding the historical use of the site, and more importantly, about the lives of the people who lived there. When recovered from their original context and in association with a specific historical use, historical deposits related to an institution which served the handicapped can provide a wealth of information about overall institutional practices, prevailing attitudes towards specific populations (i.e., physically challenged children), availability of resources for an underserved population, local medicinal practices, and how and when adaptive mechanisms were employed.

Similarly, if shaft features and other more shallowly buried historical resources potentially present on the East 38th Street site have not been physically impacted by subsequent activities, then they have the potential to address research issues regarding the nature of early residential occupation and lifeways in this section of the city. Shaft contents have generally provided the best archaeological contexts for the understanding of household dietary patterns and various other aspects of household composition, social and economic status, life cycle, etc. Even though documentation indicated that the city sewer system was constructed in the neighborhood from 1850 to 1856, no evidence was found as to when the project site property was connected to the sewer system. Consequently, privies may have been in use well past the construction date of the sewer system. In general, middens (yard deposits), fence posts, paths and traces of landscaping are somewhat limited in their ability to provide information on these topics; however, they can provide information regarding the use of yard space.

PROPOSED FIELDWORK

Prior to the initiation of field testing, a Health and Safety Plan (HASP) will be developed for the archaeologists working on the site. All applicable OSHA safety standards will be observed to insure the safety of the public and archaeological personnel during implementation of the testing plan. The HASP plan will be approved by the MTA before any archaeological field investigations begin. All safety regulations regarding hand tests in trenches will be observed.

Appendix E


MTA and/or the professional team of archaeologists will notify SHPO when testing is scheduled to begin and assist in arranging a SHPO staff site visit if required.

Since it will be necessary to keep each project site open until the completion of the excavations, chain-link fencing/construction fence panels will be used to secure the project sites, while shoring will be utilized where it is needed. In addition, "Danger" and/or "No Trespassing" signs will be posted and attached to the construction fencing.

The proposed testing protocol for the East 50th Street site is presented first, followed by the protocol for the 38th Street site.

East 50th Street Shaft Site

Prior to any field testing, existing structures in the sensitive areas will be removed from the site following the protocol set forth below. After the buildings are removed, a portion of Lots 43, 45, and 46 will be field tested. Fieldwork will commence with the establishment of one or more survey stations within the project site. These points will permit the accurate placement of discovered resources. Fieldwork will proceed in several stages, as follows. Each successive level of testing will direct the next, more invasive form of testing.

Initially, the East Side Access Project’s contractors will proceed with the removal of the foundations of the late 19th and 20th century structures in the sensitive areas to the depth of the foundation slabs under the direction of an archaeologist who will monitor the site. The archaeologist will determine, based on the demolition schedule as provided by the contractor, the need for monitoring. To ensure that potentially sensitive levels are not inadvertently disturbed during this stage, excavations will only extend to the depth of the existing bottom of vault/basement floors and walls.

Any slab foundations in the sensitive areas will be mechanically removed under the direction of an archaeologist. Once this is complete, the area will be shovel scraped in order to determine if potential intact artifact bearing deposits or shaft features are present immediately below the floors or foundations.

If no shaft features are readily apparent, subsurface testing will then entail the mechanical excavation of test trenches within all the sensitive areas, the size of which is determined by the width of each lot. A toothless backhoe bucket (or one with a steel plate welded across the bucket) will be required. The goal of the trenching will be to locate any potential features within fill levels, and to establish the presence or absence of potentially sensitive undisturbed strata beneath the fill — if any are present. Three east-west trenches and one north-south trench, oriented to the boundaries of the lots, are proposed. The east-west trenches will be approximately 8 feet wide by 20 feet long on Lots 43, 45, and 46. An additional north-south trench will be excavated along the eastern side of Lot 43, a location that documentary research has indicated may not be disturbed. This trench will also measure roughly 8 feet wide by 20 feet long. It is expected that testing may also involve hand excavated test units as deemed appropriate by the archaeologist. Hand units would be required if intact deposits are found, as described below under “If Intact Archaeological Resources Are Found.”

Appendix E


It is assumed that the testing will take an estimated six to ten days, including monitoring prior to testing.

East 38th Street Shaft Site

Prior to the undertaking of Stage 1B field investigations, geotechnical borings will be undertaken in coordination with the professional archaeologist. The geotechnical borings will be taken in locations and to the specifications of the professional archaeologist (3” diameter continuous tube samples) so as to provide information useful to the archaeologist. Provisions will be made for the archaeologist to be on site at the time the borings are taken if the archaeologist so requests. The boring logs will be provided to the professional archaeologist for review to allow an assessment of subsurface conditions, such as previous disturbance including filling and grading, and/or the presence of original soils.

Following the archaeologist’s review of the borings, the archaeologist will refine conclusions about the potential presence of archaeological resources presented in the Stage 1A. Should the borings indicate the site has been completely disturbed and does not possess the potential to contain archaeological resources and SHPO concurs with the assessment, no further archaeological investigations will be undertaken. If the site is determined to retain archaeological sensitivity, a Stage 1B field testing program will be undertaken as directed by the professional archaeologist.

It is expected that any such field testing program would begin with the establishment of one or more survey stations within the project site to permit the accurate placement of discovered resources. Excavation techniques would likely involve a combination of backhoe trenching, hand clearing, and hand-excavated test units. A toothless backhoe bucket (or one with a steel plate welded across the bucket) would be used in order to avoid any inadvertent disturbances to intact resources during trenching activities. The backhoe would be utilized to remove the asphalt surface and bedding material followed by hand clearing to determine the presence of shaft features and/or intact deposits. If none are present, then a series of machine-excavated trenches or test pits would be utilized to test the site as determined appropriate by the archaeologist. The backhoe would remove any modern or disturbed fill deposits that may be present. Fill deposits of recent origin, or that have been subjected to extensive disruption, would not be screened, though diagnostic artifacts would be retained on a selective basis.

RE-EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY

For the East 50th Street site (and the East 38th Street site should a trenching testing program be undertaken as indicating by boring log review), upon the completion of the trenches, a reevaluation of potential sensitivity will be made. If, at this stage, it is determined that there are no features present within or beneath the fill (if any), or that the original ground surface has been severely compromised by prior undocumented construction episodes and, therefore, lacks any integrity, then no additional testing would be warranted.

IF NO INTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS ARE FOUND

It is possible that the Stage 1B testing will indicate that one or both of the sites lack sufficient integrity to produce significant archaeological resources and excavation may not recover any

Appendix E


historical features or deposits, or that Stage 1B testing may not encounter any features. If this is the case, no further archaeological work would be warranted, and a report to that effect would be prepared for SHPO’s review.

IF INTACT ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS ARE FOUND

Additional Stage IB and Stage II Archaeological Investigations and Treatment of Artifacts

If intact cultural deposits are encountered, machine excavation will stop. At minimum one hand-excavated test unit will then be utilized within each trench. Any features located would be sufficiently sampled so as to indicate if further testing is necessary. However, the testing of deep stratified features (such as wells, privies, and cisterns) will be kept to a minimum sufficient to demonstrate integrity and information potential. As these important resources are not easily tested, the strategy will focus on the exposure and mapping of these features so that the overall distribution pattern may be derived for the project area. In order to maximize the understanding of any recovered shaft features, the interior/exterior on one side would be exposed to examine the stratigraphic layers within the feature. This method is designed to allow for the potential recovery of information, such as date of construction, the date the feature was discontinued or filled, and a sample of the variety of materials within the feature. SHPO will be consulted for their concurrence of proposed excavation plans, and diagrams and other illustrative material will be submitted as required. This information can be used as a basis for decisions regarding future work.

Professional standards for excavation, screening, recording of features and stratigraphy, labeling, mapping, photographing, and cataloging will be applied. All soils from the test units will be screened through ¼-inch-mesh hardware cloth and excavated by natural strata. Soils from both the trenches and units will be described using the Munsell color system and standard texture classifications. All artifacts recovered during screening will be retained, with the exception of bulk materials such as concrete rubble, brick, large metal objects, ash coal, cinders, and slag. In the case of such materials, a sample will be described and weighed from each provenience and the remainder will be quantified and discarded in the field. Recovered artifacts will be bagged according to their unique provenience and transported to the laboratory for processing, conservation, and analysis. An artifact catalog, recording the depth and location of each recovered artifact, will be created. Soil profiles, cultural features, etc. will be described, photographed on both black-and-white print, color slide film, digital format and illustrated by measured drawings in engineers scale using tenths of feet in plan and vertical perspective, as appropriate. At the conclusion of field investigations, all excavated areas will be backfilled, leveled, and left as close to original condition as possible.

Determination of National Register Eligibility

If intact archaeological resources are found on one or both of the project sites, resources will be documented as appropriate via written descriptions, maps indicating the location of resource(s), black and white photographs and limited architectural drafting. Consultation with the SHPO during this stage would be warranted. An evaluation of potential significance, typically referred to as a Stage II evaluation, will also be completed. This component of the site review will be aimed at assessing each resource’s potential eligibility for the National Register, and must

Appendix E


document resource integrity including physical elements. During this stage of the assessment, additional documentary research on the historical and cultural significance of the resource type(s) encountered may be carried out in order to place the resource within a historical framework. An assessment of the information that the property has yielded or may likely yield will be completed and submitted for review by the SHPO.

If this stage of research identifies significant (National Register eligible) archaeological resources, which will be impacted by the proposed project, Stage III mitigation measures will be designed in consultation with SHPO. This would likely consist of data recovery (excavation). Other acceptable mitigation measures may also include the preparation of an educational booklet, exhibit design, as determined appropriate by SHPO.

If required, a scope of work for a mitigation plan would be created in consultation with SHPO and depending on the type and extent of resources encountered. At this time, it is beyond the scope of this protocol to define a mitigation plan.

Artifact Analysis and Report Results

Prior to any analysis, all artifacts will be cleaned and labeled. Any artifact needing conservation will be removed from the collection for separate processing and evaluation. Historical artifacts will be analyzed in terms of material type, form, function, and temporal attributes (e.g., Noël Hume 1969, South 1977, Miller 1991). Detailed analysis will include the identification of the Terminus Post Quem (TPQ) of artifacts for each context and generation of mean beginning and end dates for assemblages. This information will be used to establish the contemporaneity of contexts and strata, and to determine whether which assemblages represent primary or secondary deposits.

A report documenting the results of the background and document search, field effort, and artifact analyses will be prepared according to the New York Archaeological Council (NYAC) standards (1994). In addition, the report will include a discussion on the potential National Register eligibility of any artifact deposits and/or features and recommendations for additional investigations, if needed, on those resources with potential eligibility for National Register listing. This report will be submitted to SHPO for their review.

This protocol must address the possibility of a collection of artifacts retrieved at the site, and an intended repository for such artifacts. Although any artifact collection removed from the project site will be the property of the project site owner (MTA), in accord with SHPO guidelines, the professional archaeologist will properly prepare the collection for curation and assist MTA in locating an appropriate long-term repository. However, it is ultimately the MTA’s responsibility in locating an approved facility. Funds for the long-term curation of a collection may be requested from MTA by the repository, as some repositories charge a one-time acceptance fee for a collection.

Documents

APPENDIX C-2 MTA/LIRR East Side Access Construction