5-1 June 2021

Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5.1 INTRODUCTION 

This chapter presents the analysis the FRA conducted of the potential effects of the No Action 

Alternative and the Preferred Alternative on land use, zoning, and adopted planning and policy 

documents. “Land use” refers to the activity that occurs on land and within the structures that 

occupy it—for example, residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and community facilities, 

transportation-related, parks and recreational facilities, and vacant land. Zoning is the legal method 

by which municipalities define what land uses are allowed on a given parcel of land and the physical 

restrictions that have been placed on development, such as bulk, height, or setbacks. The analysis 

considers the uses and development trends in the area that may be affected by the Preferred 

Alternative, and determines whether the Preferred Alternative is compatible with those conditions 

or may affect them. The analysis also considers the Preferred Alternative’s consistency with, and 

effect on, the area’s zoning and other applicable regional plans and policies. In addition, this 

chapter identifies any need for property acquisitions or displacements for the Preferred Alternative. 

5.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT

FRA followed 23 CFR Part 771 and relevant CEQ guidelines, as well as the methodology 

guidelines set forth in the CEQR Technical Manual (see Chapter 4, Section 300) to prepare the 

analyses presented in this chapter. No land acquisitions or displacements are anticipated; 

however, FRA would adhere to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition 

Policies Act of 1970, as amended. For details on the regulatory context for this resource category,

please see Regulatory Context in Chapter 2 of Appendix B, “Methodology Report.”

5.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

This analysis addresses land use, land planning, and property assessment including a review of 

existing land use and land use trends and patterns, review of existing zoning, review of relevant 

policies and plans, and analysis of future development and transportation projects likely to be 

implemented by others. Direct effects on Study Area land uses, zoning, or regional plans and 

policies may constitute an adverse impact if the change would negatively affect community 

facilities or community character, or if the Preferred Alternative would generate land use 

designation that would be incompatible with existing or surrounding uses or development patterns. 

Please see Analysis Methodology in Chapter 2 of Appendix B for a complete description of the 

analysis methodology for this resource category.

5.4 STUDY AREA

The Study Area for the assessment of land use, planning, and policy is the area 1⁄2-mile radius 

from the 13-acre Project Site as shown in Figure 5-1. The Study Area for this resource category 

includes the Project Site and extends outward to include routes for travel of construction workers, 

materials, and services, and represents the distance that, based on CEQR Technical Manual

guidelines, defines the area in which the Preferred Alternative could cause impacts. The Study 

Area is consistent with study areas for the environmental analysis of similar projects in New York 

City.
F

!

F

F

!

F

F

F

!

F

!

F

F

!

F

F

!

F

W 34th St

W 25th St

W 35th St

Joe Dimaggio Hwy

W 31st St

Ninth Ave

W 26th St

Tenth Ave

W 22nd St

W 33rd St

Dye

r

Av

e

Eighth Ave

W 40th St

W 24th St

W 37th St

W 30th St

W 29th St

W 43rd St

Lincoln Tunnel

W 44th St

Eleventh Ave

W 38th St

W 27th Dr

W 21st St

W 41st St

W 36th St

W 42nd St

W 39th St

W 20th St

W 28th St

W 23rd St

W 27th St

Hudson Blvd E HUDSON RIVER

Chelsea

Park

Chelsea

Waterside

Park

Hudson

River

Park

1

2

3

4

5 6

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy Study Area

Figure 5-1

0 1,000 FEET

12.14.20

Project Site (Western Rail Yard) A

Study Area (1/2-mile perimeter)

F

F

!1 Photograph View Direction and Reference Number
June 2021 5-2 

5.5 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Currently, a mix of concrete walls and fencing on three sides encloses the Project Site (see 

Figures 5-2 through 5-4). The eastern edge of the Project Site sits below the Eleventh Avenue 

Viaduct, allowing trains to pass below the Eastern Rail Yard project site (described below) and 

travel to New York’s Penn Station. There are three existing LIRR buildings (at the ends of several 

storage tracks) on the western edge of the Project Site. The southern portion of the Project Site, 

between West 30th Street and the approximate location of West 31st Street (Lot 1), includes solid 

land. 

5.5.1 LAND USE

The Project Site is the MTA’s existing rail yard, which is used and operated by LIRR as a commuter 

railroad storage yard and maintenance facility. As discussed in Chapter 3, “Alternatives,” in 

addition to the tracks, there are multiple LIRR support facilities on the Project Site. Along the 

southern and western perimeter of the Project Site is the elevated High Line, a public open space, 

which wraps around the Western Rail Yard.

As shown on Figure 5-5, the Study Area is quite large, and the land use patterns vary throughout 

the Study Area. The northern portion of the Study Area is Manhattan’s Hell’s Kitchen 

neighborhood. The Hell’s Kitchen area is comprised of a mix of four- to 15-story residential 

buildings with ground-floor retail and some large residential towers. The neighborhood also has 

commercial and office buildings varying in size from one-story to 20-stories and one large 62-story 

commercial and office building. There are limited industrial and manufacturing uses in the Hell’s 

Kitchen portion of the Study Area. The Lincoln Tunnel approach and exit roads make up a cluster 

of transportation and utility uses between West 40th Street to West 38th Street. Multiple parking 

facilities are found throughout this area serve the Port Authority Bus Terminal, which is just outside 

the Study Area. A large public facility and institutional parcel, the Jacob K. Javits Convention 

Center, is also within the Hell’s Kitchen section of the Study Area, between Eleventh and Twelfth 

Avenues and West 34th and West 39th Streets.

The southern portion of the Study Area is the Chelsea neighborhood of Manhattan. The Chelsea 

area is primarily brownstone row houses and four-story residential buildings, some with groundfloor retail; and a handful of 10-story to 25-story residential buildings. A large residential complex 

comprised of four 22-story buildings are located between Eighth and Ninth Avenues from West 

23rd to West 28th Streets. A New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) residential complex, the 

Chelsea-Elliott Houses, is located between on the blocks Ninth and Tenth Avenues and West 25th 

and West 27th Streets. 

Immediately east of the Project Site is the Eastern Rail Yard project, a high-density mixed-use 

neighborhood development constructed above an active rail yard on a platform that opened in 

2019. The superblock development includes four office buildings, two residential buildings, a 

shopping mall, an arts center, and an art installation known as the Vessel. The Eastern Rail Yard 

superblock and the Project Site make up the Hudson Yards neighborhood in Manhattan. 

The historic Farley Building, located between Eighth and Ninth Avenues between West 31st and 

West 33rd Streets, is in the eastern portion of the Study Area. The Farley Building is part of the 

Moynihan Station Project renovations to create a new passenger rail station and mixed-use facility 

with retail, public facility, and office space. 
11.11.20

View west to Project Site from Hudson Yards plaza 

Project Site, view west on West 33rd Street from Eleventh Avenue 

Project Site Existing Conditions 

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Figure 5-2 

1

2
11.11.20

Project Site, view northeast on Twelfth Avenue from West 30th Street 

View east to Project Site from Hudson River Park 

Project Site Existing Conditions 

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Figure 5-3 

3

4
11.11.20

Project Site, view east on West 30th Street 

Project Site, view northwest at Eleventh Avenue and West 30th Street 

Project Site Existing Conditions 

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT Figure 5-4 

5

6
W 34th St

W 25th St

W 35th St

Joe Dimaggio Hwy

W 31st St

Ninth Ave

W 26th St

Tenth Ave

W 22nd St

W 33rd St

Dyer Av

e

Eighth Ave

W 40th St

W 24th St

W 37th St

W 30th St

W 29th St

W 43rd St

Lincoln Tunnel

W 44th St

Eleventh Ave

Twelfth Ave

W 38th St

W 27th Dr

W 21st St

W 41st St

W 36th St

W 42nd St

W 39th St

W 20th St

W 28th St

W 23rd St

W 27th St

Hudson Blvd E HUDSON RIVER

Chelsea

Park

Hudson

River

Park

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

Land Use in the Study Area

Affected Environment

Figure 5-5

Project Site (Western Rail Yard)

Study Area (1/2-mile perimeter)

Commercial and Offce Buildings

Hotels

Industrial and Manufacturing

Open Space and Outdoor Recreation

Parking Facilities

Public Facilities and Institutions

Residential

Residential with Commercial Below

Transportation and Utility

Vacant Land

Vacant Building

Under Construction

2.10.21 Data source: NYC Dept. of City Planning MapPLUTO 20v7 and AKRF study area survey

0 1,000 FEET
Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5-3 June 2021

As discussed in Chapter 4, “Analysis Framework,” multiple private development and transportation 

projects are anticipated to be in operation by 2026, and therefore, are included in the affected 

environment of this analysis. Directly south of the Project Site, multiple structures are under 

construction. At 601 West 29th Street, a 931-unit residential tower is under construction, which 

will also have about 11,000 gsf of retail space and 186 parking spaces. Additionally, on the same 

block, at 610 West 30th Street another project consisting of 277 residential units and about 

160,000 gsf of retail is under development.

Additionally, throughout the Study Area other construction projects are under way which reflect 

the mixed-use character of the Study Area. North of the Project Site, at 495 Eleventh Avenue, a 

mixed-use development is under construction, which, when completed, will include 275 residential 

units, about 17,000 gsf of retail space, a 755-room hotel, about 50,000 gsf of public facility space, 

and about 25,000 gsf of office space. Additionally, at 401 West 31st Street, a 790-unit residential 

building with about 4,050,000 gsf of office space is being constructed. See Table 4-1 and Table 

4-2 for additional details on the planned transportation and development projects included in the 

Affected Environment. 

Table 5-1 shows the Study Area tax lots devoted to various Land Uses in the Affected 

Environment. Note that the percentages shown in the table do not account for land occupied by 

roadways and sidewalks. 

Table 5-1 

Land Uses in the Study Area – Affected Environment

Land Use Percentage of Lot Area in the Study Area

Commercial and Office Buildings 16.2%

Hotels 1.3%

Industrial and Manufacturing 1.9%

Open Space and Outdoor Recreation 6.7%

Parking Facilities 3.8%

Public Facilities and Institutions 10.5%

Residential 12.5%

Residential with Commercial Below 13.7%

Transportation and Utility 27.8%

Under Construction 1.4%

Vacant Building 0.1%

Vacant Land 4.2%

Source: NYC Dept. of City Planning MapPLUTO 20v7 and AKRF Study Area Survey

5.5.2 LAND PLANNING, ZONING, AND POLICY

The following provides a detailed description of the existing land planning, zoning, and policies

applicable to the Project Site and the Study Area. 

5.5.2.1 LAND PLANNING AND ZONING 

As shown on Figure 5-6, the Project Site is zoned C6-4, a commercial district. C6 districts permit 

high-density commercial (retail and office) uses and are reserved for central business district 

locations, such as Midtown Manhattan. C6 districts are commonly mapped in special districts. The 

C6-4 district permits a base commercial floor area ratio (FAR) of 10. In addition to commercial 

uses, commercial zoning districts permit residential uses by applying the regulations of an 

equivalent residential district; the C6-4 district has a residential district equivalent of an R10 

district, which is a high-density residential district typically found in the highest density areas of 

Manhattan, such as along Park and Fifth Avenues.
! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! 

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! 

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! 

! ! ! 

! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! 

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! ! ! ! 

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! 

! ! 

! 

! 

! 

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! 

! ! 

! ! 

! 

! 

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! 

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

! ! !

W 34th St

W 25th St

W 35th St

Joe Dimaggio Hwy

W 31st St

Ninth Ave

W 26th St

Tenth Ave

W 22nd St

W 33rd St

Eighth Ave

Dy

W 40th St

er Ave

W 24th St

W 37th St

Lincoln Tunnel

W 30th St

W 29th St

W 43rd St

W 44th St

Eleventh Ave

Twelfth Ave

W 38th St

W 21st St

W 41st St

W 36th St

W 42nd St

W 39th St

W 20th St

W 28th St

W 27th St

HUDSON RIVER

C4-5

C6-3

R8B

C6-6.5

M1-5

C2-6

C6-2

R9

C6-2A

C6-2A

C6-3X

C1-6A

M1-6D

C1-7A R8

M1-6

M1-5

M1-5

C6-4M

C6-4

R10

M1-5

C6-4X

C2-7A

M1-5

M1-6

C6-2

C6-7

M2-3

M2-3

R7B

C6-3A M1-5

C2-6A

C2-6

C6-2A

R8B

M1-5

R8

C2-8

C6-5

C6-4M

C6-2A

R8A

R7B

C6-3

R8

C6-2

R8A

C1-6A

C6-7T

M1-5

M2-4

R8A

C6-4

C6-4

C6-4

C6-4

R8A

R8

C6-2

M1-5

M1-5

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

Existing Zoning in Study Area

Figure 5-6

Project Site (Western Rail Yard)

Study Area (1/2-mile perimeter)

Zoning District Boundary

C1-5 Commercial Overlay District

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

C2-5 Commercial Overlay District

Park Boundary

Special Clinton District

Special Garment Center District

Special Hudson River Park District

Special Hudson Yards District

Special Midtown District

Special West Chelsea District

1.15.21 Data source: NYC Dept. of City Planning GIS Zoning Features, September 2020

0 1,000 FEET
June 2021 5-4 

The Project Site is also within the Special Hudson Yards District, which was adopted into the New 

York City Zoning Resolution in 2005 as part of the comprehensive rezoning of the Hudson Yards. 

The Special Hudson Yards District was established to encourage a mix of uses and densities, 

provide new publicly accessible open space, extend the Midtown central business district by 

providing opportunities for substantial new office and hotel development, reinforce existing 

residential neighborhoods and encourage new housing on Manhattan’s Far West Side. The 

Special Hudson Yards District provides for flexible as-of-right building height and setback controls

to enable large footprint office buildings and to promote creative design within heavy commercial 

areas. The Special Hudson Yards District requires development to include retail use on major 

corridors, street wall continuity, pedestrian circulation space, plantings, subway entrance 

easements, and screened or below-grade parking. The district has unique off-street parking 

regulations that manage the total amount of parking that can be constructed in the district as it is 

developed. The Project Site is designated as Subdistrict F under the Special Hudson Yards 

District, and is subject to a site plan that includes required public access and open space in 

anticipation of a new development on a platform spanning the rail yard.

In addition to the C6-4 district, there are multiple special purpose districts within the Study Area 

as well as a mix of manufacturing districts, commercial districts, and residential districts. Within 

the Study Area, about 44 percent is zoned a commercial district, 40 percent is zoned a 

manufacturing district, and 14 percent is zoned a residential district (2 percent is designated park 

area, which is not subject to zoning). A map illustrating the zoning in the Study Area is provided 

on Figure 5-6 and Table 5-2 provides a short description of the special purpose districts within 

the Study Area. 

The Hell’s Kitchen portion of the Study Area is characterized by medium to light industrial zones

(e.g., M2-3 and M1-5), and high-density residential zones (R8A). The commercial zones in the 

Hell’s Kitchen portion of the Study Area require central locations that serve the entire metropolitan 

region (C6-4) as well as commercial uses that serve local retail needs within residential 

neighborhoods (C2-8). 

The Chelsea portion of the Study Area is characterized by high-density residential districts that 

encourage mid-rise apartment buildings on smaller lots and, on larger lots, taller buildings with 

lower lot coverage (R8) as well as contextual residential districts which permit high lot 

coverage apartment buildings of roughly 12 to 14 stories tall (R8A). The manufacturing zones in 

the Chelsea section of the Study Area are characterized as medium to light industrial zones. The 

commercial zones in the Chelsea section of the Study Area require central locations or serve the 

entire metropolitan (C6-4).
Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5-5 June 2021

Table 5-2 

Special Zoning Districts

Special Purpose District Description

Special Clinton District Maintains the residential character in a space that is close to 

Midtown Manhattan.

Special Garment Center District Preserves opportunities for garment related production, wholesale, 

and showroom uses. 

Special Hudson River Park District

Allows for the transfer of floor area from property within the park to 

other sites to ensure redevelopment with a mix of residential and 

commercial uses.

Special Midtown District

Ensures development within the high-density area is done in ways 

that improve the working and living environment. There are multiple 

subdistricts within the Midtown District to preserve the particular 

special character of the subdistricts.

Special West Chelsea District

Provides a framework for the development of a vibrant mixed-use 

area centered on the improvement if the High Line Park. Regulations 

allow for the transfer of development rights from the High Line rightof-way to fund improvements of the High Line Park, and special bulk 

regulations ensure that light, air, and views to and from the High Line 

are preserved. 

Source: NYC Zoning Handbook at 

https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/about/publications/zoning-handbook/zoninghandbook.pdf

5.5.2.2 REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES

The following provides a description of the local and regional plans and policies applicable to the 

Project Site and the Study Area. Table 5-3 provides details about these plans and policies.
June 2021 5-6 

Table 5-3 

Local and Regional Plans and Policies

Plans and 

Policies Jurisdiction Description

New York City 

Waterfront 

Revitalization 

Program

Local

The Project Site is located in the Coastal Zone designated by New York 

State and City and is subject to the Coastal Zone management policies of 

both the City and the State. New York City has adopted a Local Waterfront 

Revitalization Program (LWRP) that has been formally approved by the New 

York State Department of State (NYSDOS) in conformance with the federal 

Coastal Zone Management Act. Chapter 16, “Coastal Zone Consistency,” 

discusses the New York City LWRP.

ONENYC Local

In April 2007, the Mayor’s Office for Long Term Planning and Sustainability 

released PlaNYC 2030 to prepare the City for one million more residents, 

strengthen the City’s economy, combat climate change, and enhance 

quality of life. The updated version of PlaNYC was released in April 2011. In 

April 2015, PlaNYC was updated and released as OneNYC, a 

comprehensive plan for a sustainable and resilient city. In April 2019, 

OneNYC 2050 was released as the official strategic plan of New York City 

for development based on “principles of growth, equity, sustainability, and 

resiliency.” The value of sustainability specifically mentions the need to 

make infrastructure improvements, as discussed in more detail in the 

“Modern Infrastructure” volume of OneNYC 2050. The document calls out 

the importance of improving the NEC Northeast Corridor (NEC) and 

specifically calls the Gateway Program (discussed below) to be the highest 

priority of transit projects. Additionally, one of the goals of OneNYC2050 is 

“Efficient Mobility,” and the plan includes multiple initiatives to help 

accomplish this goal, including Initiative 27 to strengthen connections to the 

region and the world.

Vision 2020 Local

In March 2011, NYCDCP released Vision 2020: New York City 

Comprehensive Waterfront Plan. It contains eight strategies to achieve the 

goal of improving the New York City waterfront: expand public access; 

enliven the waterfront; support the working waterfront; improve water 

quality; restore the natural waterfront; enhance the blue network; improve 

government oversight; and increase climate resilience. 

Master Plan 

Caemmerer West

Side Yard

Local

In 1989, the MTA released the Master Plan for the Caemmerer West Side 

Yard. The 1989 MTA Master Plan presented the vision for the future 

development of the Western Rail Yard Site. The 1989 MTA Master Plan 

explains that, although the yard was built to store and maintain commuter 

rail cars, it was also specifically designed to accommodate air rights 

development. MTA planned for the entire West Side Yard to be configured 

in a way that would accommodate a platform for development above the rail

yard to occur in the future.

Northeast 

Corridor 

Infrastructure 

Master Plan 

Regional

In May 2010, Amtrak, in cooperation with FRA, representatives of 12 

northeastern States, commuter railroad owners, and other stakeholders, 

prepared the Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan (NEC Master 

Plan), which predicts a significant increase in ridership and train service 

across the Hudson River by the year 2030. Numerous other studies have 

also identified the need for expansion of intercity and commuter train 

services into Penn Station.1 These studies indicate that the two existing 

100-year-old, single-track tunnels under the Hudson River, connecting New 

Jersey and New York City, are insufficient to meet the projected increase in 

demand. 

The NEC Master Plan clearly documented that the current Penn Station and 

Hudson River tunnel system is vulnerable to continuous delay and disruption 

and cannot accommodate growth essential to the region’s continued vitality.
Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5-7 June 2021

Table 5-3 (cont’d) 

Local and Regional Plans and Policies 

Plans and Policies Jurisdiction Description

Northeast 

Corridor 

Infrastructure 

Master Plan 

(cont’d)

Regional

The NEC Master Plan recommended construction of a new tunnel under the 

Hudson River to meet the need of increased commuter rail ridership projections. 

Amtrak identified the area underneath the Hudson Yards, including the 

segment of the Project Site in the Western Rail Yard where the proposed 

Tunnel Encasement would be located, as the only viable location where a 

future tunnel from the west (under the Hudson River) could provide a direct 

connection with the existing infrastructure in Penn Station.2

Amtrak’s 

Northeast 

Corridor Gateway 

Program

Regional

Amtrak’s Gateway Program, established in 2012, is Amtrak’s rail infrastructure 

improvement plan to increase capacity of the system to transport more riders 

from New Jersey to New York. The goal of the Program is to create the 

capacity that would allow double the amount of trains traveling below the 

Hudson River, eliminating the bottleneck that hinders the NEC’s level of 

service. The Program includes improvements to tracks, tunnels, bridges, and 

train stations as well as a new two-track Hudson River Tunnel to get 

passengers from Newark, NJ to New York’s Penn Station.3

NYMTC’s 

Regional 

Transportation 

Plan 2045

Regional 

New York Metropolitan Transportation Council’s (NYMTC) Regional 

Transportation Plan 2045 is a comprehensive, multimodal, and coordinated 

Regional Transportation Plan for the NYMTC planning area. The Plan covers 

the federal fiscal years from 2018 to 2045 and is themed on “Maintaining the 

Vision for a Sustainable Region.”4 From a regional perspective, the Plan 

addresses all modes of transportation including public transportation, 

roadways, bicycles and pedestrian facilities, and movements of goods. One of 

the many goals in the plan is to improve the regional economy. Under this 

goal, NYMTC lists as a near-term action the completion of the 

planning/environmental review for the Hudson Tunnel Project and Amtrak’s 

Gateway Program. The Plan also notes the importance of the Hudson Tunnel 

Project and Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor Gateway Program.

FRA’s NEC 

FUTURE Regional

In 2012, FRA, as the lead federal agency, developed a comprehensive plan 

for the Northeast Corridor (NEC) from Washington, D.C., to Boston, MA. 

FRA, along with NEC states, railroads, other stakeholders, and the public, 

determined a long-term vision and investment program for the NEC to grow 

the role of rail in the northeast by bringing the infrastructure to a state of 

good repair and providing additional capacity and service improvements to 

address passenger rail need through 2040 and beyond. Components of the

vision included improving rail service, modernizing NEC infrastructure, 

expanding rail capacity, and studying New Haven to Providence capacity.5

Notes:

1 Amtrak Vision for the Northeast Corridor 2012 Update Report; A Vision for High-Speed Rail in the 

Northeast Corridor (Amtrak, 2010); and Northeast Corridor Future Program Studies (FRA, 2013) 2 Penn Station New York Major Support Facilities and Potential Improvements Between the Hudson 

River and 7th Avenue, Preliminary Track Alignment Design and Impacted Disciplines, Phase I – 

Section 1, Final Report (Amtrak, 2011); Penn Station New York Major Support Facilities and Potential 

Improvements Between the Hudson River and 7th Avenue, Preliminary Track Alignment Design and 

Impacted Disciplines, Phase 1 – Section 2A, Draft Report. (Amtrak, 2012); Amtrak Gateway Project, 

High Speed Rail Penn Station, New York Feasibility Study, Phase 1 – Section 2B, Final Report. 

(Amtrak. 2012); and Environmental Assessment and FONSI for Construction of a Concrete Casing in 

the Hudson Yards, New York, New York, (FRA/Amtrak, 2013) (2013 FRA EA/FONSI). 3 https://nec.amtrak.com/project/the-gateway-program/ 4 https://www.nymtc.org/Portals/0/Pdf/RTP/Plan%202045%20Final%20Documents/Plan%202045%20

Full%20Main%20document/Full%20Main%20Plan%202045_R_6-27-17.pdf

5 https://www.fra.dot.gov/necfuture/
June 2021 5-8 

5.5.3 PROPERTY

As discussed in Chapter 1, “Introduction,” the Project Site is owned by MTA LIRR, and MTA LIRR 

has a lease agreement with the Overbuild Developer for the Project Site. Besides the rail yard, 

the Project Site is occupied by several LIRR support facilities, and the elevated High Line, a public 

open space that runs through a portion of the Project Site. 

5.6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

5.6.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE 

The following section describes the conditions that would exist under the No Action Alternative. 

As described in Chapter 3, the No Action Alternative includes only those projects that are 

necessary to keep the Western Rail Yard and the associated LIRR facilities in service and provide 

continued maintenance.

5.6.1.1 LAND PLANNING AND ZONING 

Under the No Action Alternative, the Project Site would remain unchanged. The Project Site would 

continue to be used as an active rail yard operated by LIRR, specifically as a commuter railroad 

storage yard and maintenance facility, and the Platform and Tunnel Encasement would not be 

constructed. 

Land uses in the No Action Alternative are identical to the land uses in the Affected Environment 

that are shown in Table 5-1. 

5.6.1.2 LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES 

Table 5-4 provides a list of the local and regional plans and policies and describes whether the 

No Action Alternative would support these plans and policies. 
Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5-9 June 2021

Table 5-4 

No Action Alternative – Local and Regional Plans and Policies 

Plans and Policies Description

New York City Waterfront 

Revitalization Program

(Local)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Platform and Tunnel Encasement 

would not be constructed; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent 

with the New York City LWRP.

ONENYC

(Local)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Platform and Tunnel Encasement 

would not be constructed; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent 

with OneNYC, which has a goal of improved mobility projects and 

strengthening connections.

Vision 2020

(Local)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Platform and Tunnel Encasement 

would not be constructed; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent 

with Vision 2020, which intends to improve the waterfront through expanding 

access and enliven the waterfront.

Master Plan Caemmerer 

West Side Yard

(Local)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Platform would not be constructed; 

therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent with the 1989 Master Plan 

for Caemmerer West Site Yard, which calls for development over the rail yard.

Northeast Corridor 

Infrastructure Master Plan

(Regional)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Tunnel Encasement would not be 

constructed and Amtrak would not preserve the ROW for a new trans-Hudson 

connection into New York Penn Station. Therefore, the No Action Alternative is 

not consistent with the NEC Master Plan.

Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor 

Gateway Program

(Regional)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Tunnel Encasement would not be 

constructed; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent with Amtrak’s 

Northeast Corridor Gateway Program. Without the construction of the Tunnel 

Encasement, Amtrak would not preserve the ROW for a new trans-Hudson 

connection into New York Penn Station.

NYMTC’s Regional 

Transportation Plan 2045

(Regional)

The proposed Tunnel Encasement would not be constructed in the No Action 

Alternative; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent with NYMTC’s 

Regional Transportation Plan 2045, which notes the importance of improving 

the regional economy and specifically calls out the Hudson Tunnel Project and 

Amtrak’s Gateway Program. Without the construction of the Tunnel 

Encasement, Amtrak would not preserve the ROW for future expansion of rail 

service from a new trans-Hudson connection into New York Penn Station. This 

would hinder the Regional Transportation Plan 2045.

FRA’S NEC FUTURE

(Regional)

In the No Action Alternative, the proposed Tunnel Encasement would not be 

built; therefore, the No Action Alternative is not consistent with FRA’s NEC 

FUTURE. Without the construction of the Tunnel Encasement, preservation of 

the ROW for future expansion of rail service from a new trans-Hudson 

connection into New York Penn Station would not happen, preventing additional 

capacity of the corridor in this area.

5.6.1.3 PROPERTY

In the No Action Alternative, no property acquisition or displacements would occur. The ownership 

and use of the Project Site would remain unchanged from present conditions. 

5.6.2 OPERATIONAL IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 

The following section describes the conditions that would occur with the Preferred Alternative. 

5.6.2.1 LAND PLANNING AND ZONING 

The Preferred Alternative would not result in any land use or zoning changes. The Platform would 

allow MTA LIRR’s commuter railroad storage yard and maintenance facility to continue functional 

operations. The Tunnel Encasement, new substation, and other LIRR service facilities would be 

consistent with the existing land use as a transportation facility. 
June 2021 5-10

In addition, the Platform would be consistent with the Hudson Yards Special District, as the 

Platform would enable development to take place above the active rail yard once construction is 

completed. 

The High Line that is located on the Project Site would remain an active open space.

As shown on Figure 5-7, land uses with the Preferred Alternative would not change. Table 5-5

provides a comparison baseline land uses in the Affected Environment and operational land uses 

during operation of the Preferred Alternative. Note that the percentages shown in the table do not 

account for land occupied by roadways and sidewalks.

Table 5-5 

Land Uses in the Study Area – Affected Environment and Preferred 

Alternative 

Land Use

Affected Environment

(Percentage of Lot 

Area in the Study Area)

Preferred Alternative

(Percentage of Lot Area in 

the Study Area)

Percent 

Change (-/+)

Commercial and Office Buildings 16.2% 16.2% 0.0%

Hotels 1.3% 1.3% 0.0%

Industrial and Manufacturing 1.9% 1.9% 0.0%

Open Space and Outdoor 

Recreation 6.7% 6.7% 0.0%

Parking Facilities 3.8% 3.8% 0.0%

Public Facilities and Institutions 10.5% 10.5% 0.0%

Residential 12.5% 12.5% 0.0%

Residential with Commercial 

Below 13.7% 13.7% 0.0%

Transportation and Utility 27.8% 27.8% 0.0%

Under Construction 1.4% 1.4% 0.0%

Vacant Building 0.1% 0.1% 0.0%

Vacant Land 4.2% 4.2% 0.0%

Source: NYC Dept. of City Planning MapPLUTO 20v7 and AKRF Study Area Survey

The land use of this parcel and the Study Area would remain unchanged. Therefore, no adverse 

impacts related to land use or zoning would occur as a result of the Preferred Alternative. 

5.6.2.2 LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS AND POLICIES 

Table 5-6 provides a discussion of the Preferred Alternative’s consistency with relevant local and 

regional plans and policies. 
W 34th St

W 25th St

W 35th St

Joe Dimaggio Hwy

W 31st St

Ninth Ave

W 26th St

Tenth Ave

W 22nd St

W 33rd St

Dyer Av

e

Eighth Ave

W 40th St

W 24th St

W 37th St

W 30th St

W 29th St

W 43rd St

Lincoln Tunnel

W 44th St

Eleventh Ave

Twelfth Ave

W 38th St

W 27th Dr

W 21st St

W 41st St

W 36th St

W 42nd St

W 39th St

W 20th St

W 28th St

W 23rd St

W 27th St

Hudson Blvd E HUDSON RIVER

Chelsea

Park

Hudson

River

Park

WESTERN RAIL YARD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT

Land Use in the Study Area

Preferred Alternative

Figure 5-7

Project Site (Western Rail Yard)

Study Area (1/2-mile perimeter)

Commercial and Offce Buildings

Hotels

Industrial and Manufacturing

Open Space and Outdoor Recreation

Parking Facilities

Public Facilities and Institutions

Residential

Residential with Commercial Below

Transportation and Utility

Vacant Land

Vacant Building

Under Construction

3.10.21 Data source: NYC Dept. of City Planning MapPLUTO 20v7 and AKRF study area survey

0 1,000 FEET
Chapter 5: Land Use, Land Planning, and Property

5-11 June 2021

Table 5-6 

Preferred Alternative – Local and Regional Plans and Policies 

Plans and Policies Description

New York City Waterfront 

Revitalization Program

(Local)

As discussed in Chapter 16, the Preferred Alternative would be consistent 

with the LWRP by supporting policies related to encouraging commercial and 

residential development in appropriate coastal zones; reducing damage from 

flooding and other water-related disasters; protecting water quality, sensitive 

habitats, and the aquatic ecosystem; and promoting development with 

appropriate land uses.

ONENYC

(Local)

The Preferred Alternative promotes OneNYC 2050’s goal of efficient mobility 

by supporting OneNYC’s initiative of strengthening connection to the region. 

In particular, the Tunnel Encasement would preserve the ROW for future 

expansion of rail service from a new trans-Hudson connection into New York 

Penn Station. The Tunnel Encasement component of the Preferred 

Alternative also supports OneNYC sustainability goals, as it would result in 

infrastructure improvements that would enable an improved NEC.

Vision 2020

(Local)

The Preferred Alternative aligns with the goals of Vision 2020 of improving 

the New York City waterfront. Although the Preferred Alternative would not 

take place directly on the waterfront, the construction of the Platform would 

allow future development to take place and would support ongoing initiatives 

to redevelop waterfront areas with active uses.

Master Plan Caemmerer West 

Side Yard

(Local)

The Preferred Alternative includes building the Platform above the Western 

Rail Yard, which would accomplish the 1989 MTA Master Plan’s vision of 

building a platform above the Yard so development could take place above 

the active rail yard. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative would be consistent 

with the 1989 MTA Master Plan.

Northeast Corridor 

Infrastructure Master Plan

(Regional)

The Preferred Alternative includes building the Tunnel Encasement, which 

would preserve the ROW for future expansion of rail service from a new transHudson connection into New York Penn Station which was determined in the 

NEC Master Plan to be necessary and urgent. Therefore, the Preferred 

Alternative would be consistent with the NEC Master Plan.

Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor 

Gateway Program

(Regional)

The Preferred Alternative includes building the Tunnel Encasement, which 

would preserve the ROW for future expansion of rail service from a new transHudson connection into New York Penn Station proposed as part Amtrak’s 

Gateway Program. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative would be consistent 

with Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor Gateway Program.

NYMTC’s Regional 

Transportation Plan 2045

(Regional)

The Preferred Alternative includes building the Tunnel Encasement, which 

would preserve the ROW for future expansion of rail service from a new 

trans-Hudson connection into New York Penn Station. NYMTC’s Regional 

Transportation Plan 2045 determined the future expansion of rail service 

between New Jersey and New York is a needed transportation investment 

due to the continued growth of the region. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative 

would be consistent with the NYMTC’s Regional Transportation Plan.

FRA’S NEC FUTURE

(Regional)

The Preferred Alternative includes construction of the Tunnel Encasement, 

which would preserve the ROW for future expansion of rail service from a 

new trans-Hudson connection into New York Penn Station which would 

increase capacity in the NEC, which is consistent with the goals and vision of 

FRA’s NEC FUTURE.

5.6.2.3 PROPERTY

The Preferred Alternative would not require any property acquisition or displacements. Therefore, 

the Preferred Alternative would not result in any adverse impacts to property ownership. 
June 2021 5-12

5.6.3 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

Construction of the Preferred Alternative would not impact land uses, land planning, or existing 

plans or policies on the Project Site or within the Study Area. All construction staging and activities 

would occur within the Project Site or adjacent roadways, and construction of the Preferred 

Alternative would not require any property acquisitions. The LIRR service facilities on the Project 

Site would be relocated on site during construction. In accordance with the Construction 

Agreement between the Project Sponsor and LIRR, the rail yard would continue to be functional 

throughout the construction of the Platform and Tunnel Encasement. The Project Sponsor would 

continue coordination with MTA and LIRR to ensure continuous operations during construction. 

The Preferred Alternative would not result in any displacements. The construction of the Tunnel 

Encasement would be consistent with current land uses on the surface. 

5.7 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION 

MEASURES

The Project Sponsor would comply with the measures specified in the Construction Environmental 

Protection Plan (CEPP)1

1 See Chapter 22, “Mitigation Measures and Project Commitments,” for a complete description of the 

elements included in the CEPP for the 2009 RD and for the Preferred Alternative.

that is specified in the 2009 Restrictive Declaration (RD) for the Overbuild 

and Platform, including the following related to land use, land planning, and property: 

• Contain construction staging and construction activities within the Project Site and adjacent 

roadways. 

• Coordinate with LIRR on the relocation of LIRR maintenance and operations facilities on the 

Project Site as they would be relocated during construction. The facilities would be housed in 

temporary facilities under the Construction Agreement between the Project Sponsor and 

LIRR. 

• Coordinate with MTA and LIRR to provide interim facilities to enable the Yard to be functional 

during construction. 