ATTACHMENT 9
THE SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF DEVELOPMENT IN DOWNTOWN BROOKLYN
By Brian T. Ketcham, P.E., Executive Director, Community Consulting Services
April 24, 2005

The development of Downtown Brooklyn will bring more jobs to Brooklyn along with tax dollars. The benefits to Brooklyn and to New York City are huge. So too are the social consequences. These include people and businesses displaced, tax dollars drained from health care, education and other social services, all to subsidize this development. To some degree these costs are part of the on-going debate over Downtown Brooklyn development. What is not generally discussed, and the subject of this paper, are the social costs—lost productivity, increased accident costs, environmental damages associated with travel—that are also huge but, so far, have been swept under the rug. This paper discusses these costs and estimates their value to society.

New York City has approved up to another 14.7 million sq. ft. of new retail, commercial and residential space for Downtown Brooklyn. This is on top of another 18 million sq. ft. that was approved over the last decade, much of which is under construction or has or is about to be completed. And, Forest City Ratner wants to build a new arena for the NETS basketball team along with more residential and commercial development totaling about 8 million sq. ft. In total, over the next 20 years, Downtown Brooklyn and its surrounding communities could get as much as 41 million sq. ft. of new development, development the size of four World Trade Centers.

1 Note that this analysis does not include the 4 to 5 million sq. ft. of added residential development rezoned for Fourth Avenue or the approx. 15 million sq. ft. of new development under consideration for Greenpoint/Williamsburg.

All of this development will have major impacts on residents and local businesses, felt nowhere more acutely than in our transportation infrastructure. Transportation is the number one concern for many who live and work in the Downtown area. This report discusses the potential for accommodating the travel associated with 41 million sq. ft. of new development. The report is broken into several parts. Travel needs for the 18 million sq. ft. on the books, much of it nearing completion; the 14.7 million sq. ft. of new development approved by NYC under its Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan; and finally the effects of the Forest City Ratner Arena project. The report ends with a brief summary of requirements for complying with New York State’s Energy Plan and its implications for SEQRA/CEQR (largely ignored by the City). Much of the material presented here and displayed in the table below can be viewed at http://www.communityconsulting.org/DTBklyn/Graphics_1_04.pdf.

The first 18 million sq. ft.

The Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan reported 31 projects in the Downtown Brooklyn area already in place or likely to be completed by 2008, totaling 12 million sq. ft. In addition to this development are nine projects in and around the Downtown area: among them, IKEA and Fairway in Red Hook, Lowes in Gowanus (completed), the movie studios in the Brooklyn Navy Yard, etc. These projects total nearly 6 million sq. ft. of new development, all adding to the travel needs in and around the Downtown area. This development will add more than 12,000 off-street parking spaces, nearly 27,000 jobs, another 8,800 residents all creating the demand for more travel. Each weekday this new development will generate 59,000 new car and truck trips, another 189,000 subway trips and 47,000 bus trips. This should be of grave concern to everyone in and around Downtown Brooklyn as we watch the MTA cut, not increase, services. The results will be significantly increased crowding for all transportation facilities. When completed, ongoing development in and around Downtown Brooklyn will generate nearly 22 million vehicle trips annually, increasing vehicle miles of travel (VMT) by nearly 108 million, increasing travel in Brooklyn by more than 2%. There are social consequences of this growth in travel. Traffic accidents, congestion and environmental damages increase. As shown in Table 2, the number of traffic deaths will increase by two annually, personal injuries will increase by more than 190 and property damage-only accidents will increase by more than 370.

The cost to society not covered by insurance of these car and truck accidents is more than $27 million a year. The increased cost of congestion and lost productivity from adding 108 million VMT totals more than $50 million a year. As shown in Table 3, the total social costs of adding 18 million sq. ft. of new development in and around Downtown Brooklyn totals nearly $100 million a year. The question is does the addition of 18 million sq. ft. of new development more than offset these losses?2

2 See Appendix A for a discussion of social costs in New York City.

The Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan

This plan was recently approved for 14.7 million sq. ft. of additional development. It was sold as just 6.7 million sq. ft. but that was just for the first 10 years of future development, or by 2013. The rest is expected to occur in the following 10 years and there is good reason to believe that much of that development will actually take place sooner. The impact of this new development could be nearly as great as that occurring for the first 18 million sq. ft. now underway. If fully built out the Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan could add 33,000 more jobs, more than 7,000 new residents and about 3,700 new off-street parking spaces. These new folks would make about 34,000 more car and truck trips, add another 184,000 trips to the Downtown subway system and create the demand for 37,000 more bus trips. These are huge impacts yet the City shrugged off these travelers as having little effect on our roads or subways. Does anyone outside City government really believe this? And, where is the MTA in the debate? Cutting services! Rezoning for the Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan was recently approved by Community Board 2, the Brooklyn Borough President, the City Planning Commission and the City Council.

All these esteemed political bodies ignored the social consequences of adding nearly 15 million sq. ft. of additional development to Downtown Brooklyn. This cost, totaling nearly $84 million each year, is of considerable consequence to the people who live and work in and around Downtown Brooklyn. When fully built out, 14.7 million sq. ft. of new development will generate more than 12 million vehicle trips annually, increasing vehicle miles of travel (VMT) by nearly 86 million, increasing travel in Brooklyn by another 2%. The consequence is that traffic accidents, congestion and environmental damages will increase still more. Table 2 shows that, annually, the number of traffic deaths will increase by one more person, personal injuries will increase by more than 150 and property damage-only accidents will increase by nearly 300.

The social costs of additional traffic accidents from the Downtown Brooklyn Development Plan ignored by our government officials and not covered by insurance, is nearly $22 million a year. The increased cost of congestion and lost productivity from adding 86 million VMT totals more than $46 million a year. Table 3 summarizes the total social costs of adding another 14.7 million sq. ft. of new development in and around Downtown Brooklyn.

Forest City Ratner NETS Arena

The Forest City Ratner project will add another 8 million sq. ft. to the area in the eastern section of Downtown Brooklyn. With 32 million sq. ft. already approved and much underway, it is of some concern that there will be sufficient demand for so much additional space. However, assuming the demand exists at some point in the future, we estimate it would add 14,000 jobs, nearly 8,000 new residents and 3,000 more off-street parking spaces. The project would add another 23,000 car and truck trips concentrated in the Flatbush/Atlantic Avenue area, plus another 57,000 subway trips and 20,000 bus trips. Contrary to what might be a common belief, most of this additional travel would not be from the NETS arena. And, with all the travel generated from current and proposed (and approved) new development, it is not at all clear that Downtown Brooklyn can handle the added travel without some very significant mitigation (such as tolling the East River Bridges and investing about $4 billion in new transit capacity).

Finally, we have the social consequences of the Forest City Ratner NETS Arena. While an environmental impact statement has not yet been issued for this project, we know enough to estimate the social costs of this development. Table 3 shows these costs will total about $76 million a year. As for the development described above, these are costs that will be borne by people who live, work or pass through the Downtown Brooklyn area. Eight million sq. ft. of Arena development will generate more than 8 million vehicle trips annually, increasing vehicle miles of travel by nearly 76 million, increasing travel in Brooklyn by slightly less than 2% (in addition to the 4% that will be produced county-wide by the earlier 33 million sq. ft. of new approved development). Traffic accidents, congestion and environmental damages will increase still more. Table 2 shows that the number of traffic deaths will increase by one more person annually, personal injuries will increase by more than 130 and property damage-only accidents will increase by more that 260. The cost to society of the additional traffic accidents from the NETS Arena, not covered by insurance, is more than $19 million a year. The increased cost of congestion and lost productivity from adding 76 million VMT totals more than $43 million a year. Table 3 summarizes the total social costs of adding another 8 million sq. ft. of new development in and around Downtown Brooklyn from the NETS Areas, on top of the 33 million sq. ft. already approved, of more than $75 million.

Completing all new development proposed for Downtown Brooklyn and its nearby communities, a total of more than 41 million sq. ft. (excluding the Fourth Avenue residential development) will impose social costs on the people who live and work in this community of more than $250 million a year. These are real costs that are shifted from the private developer and our government to people who may not directly benefit from this development. The only way to justify these costs is for the new development to provide benefits to these communities of at least $250 million every year. It is the responsibility of our government (who has and/or will approve these projects) to demonstrate convincingly that these projects will provide benefits exceeding their social costs. Moreover, in order to accommodate the additional traffic (100,000 more car and truck trips) and increased transit use (more than 400,000 additional subway riders and 100,000 bus riders) New York City must invest between $4 billion and $5 billion for infrastructure improvements. New York City and State have less than a half billion dollars a year budgeted for bridge and roadway improvements city-wide, and the MTA is currently showing deficits totaling more than $2 billion a year as soon as 2008. At the current time it does not appear the needed infrastructure improvements are forthcoming. If this is the case, then the estimated social costs are significantly underestimated.3 If the needed infrastructure improvements cannot be made the social costs of adding more than 41 million sq. ft. of new development will greatly exceed a quarter billion dollars a year, costs that will be imposed on everyone who lives, works or travels through Downtown Brooklyn.

3 Without continuing maintenance to bring our roads, bridges and transit to a state-of-good-repair, congestion levels will grow, traffic accidents and environmental damages will increase.

The New York State Energy Plan

What has been ignored in the on-going debate over all new development in and around Downtown Brooklyn are the energy savings and environmental requirements of the New York State Energy Plan. This Plan actually requires New York City to at least consider the effect of any action (such as new traffic generating development) on energy demand and global warming.

The following summarizes the requirements in an advisory prepared by the New York State Department of Transportation:4

“The Department has committed to do all it can to implement and attain the goals and recommendations in the 2002 State Energy Plan (SEP). In order to do so, energy, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions must become key factors in developing statewide, regional and urban area plans and programs and in the selection of alternatives at the project stage. In addition, these parameters must be brought more into consideration in the routine day-to-day operations of the [Transportation] Department. The following is offered as guidance to comply with specific recommendations in the SEP.

• Working with regional and local planning organizations, analyze and quantify the energy use and air pollution emissions expected to result from transportation plans and programs

• The State adopts the goal of reducing statewide primary energy use in 2010 to 25% below 1990 energy use per unit of gross state product, and increasing the share of renewable energy as a percentage of primary energy use 50% by 2020, up from 10% in 2000 to 15% in 2020

• Commit to a statewide goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 5% below 1990 levels by 2010, and 10% below 1990 levels by 2020

• Redirect transportation funding toward energy efficient transportation alternatives, including public transportation, walking and bicycle, and provide incentives to encourage greater use of related alternatives that improve transportation efficiency

• Target open space funding to prevent suburban sprawl, promote quality communities, reduce vehicle miles traveled, and support , adopt and enhance transportation measures that reduce energy use and pollutant emissions

4 Reference “Subtask 12b: Draft Greenhouse Gas (CO2) Emissions Estimate Guidelines for TIPs and Plans,” New York State Department of Transportation, November 25, 2003, page 5.

• Support, adopt, and enhance transportation measures that reduce energy use and pollutant emissions, such as commuter choice, ozone action days, diesel vehicle retrofits, improved traffic signal coordination with light emitting diode (LED) replacement technology, transportation system management, and other similar actions

• Include in the state transportation planning and State Environmental Quality review Act (SEQRA) related processes, consideration of CO2 production and mitigation strategies, as appropriate

• The State will ensure that transportation planning and construction is compatible with current planned community development

• The State supports expanding intermodal freight capabilities as a means to reduce transportation sector energy use

• The State’s emphasis on maintaining its existing transportation infrastructure through capital construction programs will be continued.”

There is clearly a disconnect between what is happening in Downtown Brooklyn and the New York State government. The State is calling for a reduction in vehicle travel; these projects will add nearly 270 million vehicle miles of travel (and that is assuming that only 12% of all travelers use automobiles not the 37% of workers who currently use autos to get to and from work in the Downtown area). The State calls for improvements and expansion of transit; the City and the MTA are cutting back services. Two hundred and seventy million miles of travel will increase gasoline consumption by 15 million gallons a year, increasing CO2 emissions by 150,000 tons a year. New York State, via its Energy Plan, is eager to reduce this consumption. New York City should at least find ways of reducing these costs.

Next Steps

New development in and around Downtown Brooklyn has a number of benefits: new and retained jobs (that might otherwise go to New Jersey), new opportunities, increased cash flow and income for Brooklyn, and increased taxes. However, these benefits have yet to be fully characterized or quantified. This is a job for the New York City Economic Development Corporation and its clients, developers. It is not the intent of this paper to do their work. It is the intent of this paper to force the EDC and/or future developers to come forward with a quantification of benefits. This paper is intended to contrast these benefits, whatever they may be, with the social costs of new development. It is limited at this time to just those costs associated with the growth in traffic, more than 100,000 new weekday car and truck trips that will accompany 41 million sq. ft. of new development. It should be emphasized that this estimate assumes the very optimistic assumptions made by the City, that most travelers to and from Downtown Brooklyn will utilize mass transit. This may or may not occur. The MTA is facing huge budget deficits and is threatening to cut services to Downtown Brooklyn. As Community Consulting Services has repeatedly demonstrated, transit service must be substantially increased to accommodate 41 million sq. ft. of new development. A reduction in transit service will do two things: force many more people to drive, increasing significantly the social costs of auto use; it will also place a ceiling on how much more development can be permitted in and around the Downtown area. And, even assuming the MTA and developers invest another $4 to $5 billion in capital improvements, traffic in Downtown will double, burdening those people who live, work and travel through the area to bear a quarter billion dollars in increased social costs as described above. The only way this can be tolerated is to demonstrate that the social benefits far exceed this magnitude. This is the challenge for the City and especially for the Economic Development Corporation. To do so will require a number of actions: