13-1 June 2021

Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13.1 INTRODUCTION

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

Alternative and the Preferred Alternative on utility infrastructure and services, in particular: water

supply, wastewater, and stormwater services; solid waste and sanitation services; and energy. 

FRA’s analysis considered the utility services and infrastructure serving the Project Site and the 

additional demands on utility infrastructure that would result from operation of the Preferred 

Alternative. In addition, the analysis considers potential effects to utility services during 

construction of the Preferred Alternative, including potential disruptions to service and any 

temporary or permanent relocation(s) of utility services that may be required. 

13.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT

The New York Public Service Commission regulates utilities, stormwater, and other related water 

utilities under the New York Energy Law. In addition, NYCDEP owns and regulates the sanitary 

sewage and stormwater collection and treatment system within New York City. For additional 

details on the regulatory context for this resource category, please refer to Chapter 10 of

Appendix B, “Methodology Report.” 

13.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY

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

guidelines set forth in the CEQR Technical Manual (see Chapters 13, 14, and 15) to prepare the 

analyses presented in this chapter. 

The Study Area for the analysis of utility infrastructure and services included the approximately 

13-acre Project Site (described in Chapter 1, “Introduction,” and shown on Figure 1-2), as well as

streets immediately adjacent to the Project Site, which may contain affected utility infrastructure.

FRA obtained and compiled information, including as-built drawings and information for proposed 

infrastructure (as available) for existing and planned utility infrastructure and services for the Study 

Area from various government entities and private service providers. FRA reviewed the available 

infrastructure plans to support the impact analysis of the No Action Alternative and the Preferred 

Alternative for these resources. 
June 2021 13-2 

FRA’s analysis considered the potential for construction to affect existing utilities, including the 

need for any utility lines (e.g., electric, potable water, and/or sewer) requiring protection, relocation 

or replacement because of construction of the Preferred Alternative, and any associated service 

disruptions that could occur, along with identifying measures to minimize potential disruptions.

This analysis also considered the additional demands that operation of the Preferred Alternative 

would place on the utility infrastructure and services in the area of the Project Site. In particular, 

the analyses focused on estimating the additional demands that the Preferred Alternative would 

place on utility services from the operation of the new and reconstructed LIRR infrastructure 

associated with the Platform (e.g., LIRR service buildings, ventilation system, life-safety systems, 

etc.), as described in more detail in Chapter 3, “Alternatives.” In addition, as the Preferred 

Alternative includes a new permanent power substation for the operation of the rail yard (also 

described in Chapter 3), the analysis evaluated the need for and potential location(s) of any 

additional new, temporary, or permanent electric power substations and any other potential 

impacts to utilities from construction or operation of the Preferred Alternative. 

Please see Analysis Methodology in Chapter 10 of Appendix B, for a complete detailed 

description of the analysis methodology FRA followed for this resource category.

13.4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

13.4.1 WATER SUPPLY

The New York City water supply system—comprised of three watersheds: the Croton, Delaware, 

and Catskill—extends as far north as the Catskill Mountains, and delivers on average 

approximately 1.1 billion gallons of water per day to customers in the five boroughs and 

Westchester County. From these watersheds, potable water is conveyed to the City via a system 

of reservoirs, aqueducts, and tunnels. Two water tunnels serving the City (Water Tunnels No. 1 

and 2) were constructed in the early 20th Century; more recently, a third tunnel, Water Tunnel No. 

3, originating at Hillview Reservoir in Yonkers, has been constructed. The portion of Water Tunnel 

No. 3 serving Midtown Manhattan, including the Project Site and the surrounding area, was 

completed and activated in 2013. In Manhattan, groundwater is not used to supply potable water.

Within the City, a grid of water pipes distributes water to customers. The existing LIRR facilities 

on the Project Site are served by a private 6-inch water main that runs along the south and west 

sides of the site, which connects to an NYCDEP water main in Twelfth Avenue. The main feeds

an internal water distribution piping network that extends primarily north-south throughout the 

Western Rail Yard. Existing water consumption at the Project Site is primarily related to LIRR 

operations within the Caemmerer Rail Yard (e.g., domestic supply, yard hydrants, and other fire 

protection systems). 

13.4.2 WASTEWATER 

The Project Site is located within a part of Manhattan that is primarily served by a combined sewer 

system operated and maintained by NYCDEP that collects both sanitary sewage and stormwater. 

In periods of dry weather, the combined sewers located in the adjacent streets convey only 

sanitary sewage. The Project Site contains a sanitary sewer system serving the existing LIRR 

facilities, which consists of five lateral pipes running by gravity through the site from north to south 

and connecting to a sanitary sewer at the south side of the site. The on-site sewer runs along the 

south side of the site and discharges to a pump station near Eleventh Avenue. The pump station 

discharges to a force main that runs east and south under Eleventh Avenue, and turns south to 

discharge into the NYCDEP combined sewer in West 30th Street. The West 30th Street sewer 

runs west to the interceptor sewer in Twelfth Avenue, which conveys flow to the North River 

Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), one of the City’s 14 WWTPs. 
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-3 June 2021

The North River WWTP is located in upper Manhattan on a platform over the Hudson River along 

Twelfth Avenue, between West 135th and West 145th Streets. At the WWTP, wastewater is fully 

treated by physical and biological process before it is discharged into the Hudson River. The 

quality of the treated wastewater (effluent) is regulated by a State Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System (SPDES) permit issued by NYSDEC, which establishes limits for effluent parameters (i.e., 

suspended solids, fecal coliform bacteria, and other pollutants). Since the volume of flow to a 

WWTP affects the level of treatment a plant can provide, the maximum permitted capacity for the 

North River WWTP is 170 million gallons per day (mgd). The average monthly flow over the last 

12-month period for which data is available is 110 mgd,1

1 Twelve-month period through March 2017.

which is well below the maximum 

permitted capacity.

13.4.3 STORMWATER 

As noted above, the Project Site is located in an area that is primarily served by a combined sewer 

system; during and immediately after wet weather, combined sewers collect stormwater runoff 

drains from City streets, building roofs, and other site surfaces. Because combined sewers can 

experience a much larger flow due to stormwater runoff collection, to control flooding at the 

WWTP, regulators are built into the system which allow only approximately two times the amount 

of design dry weather flow into the interceptors. The interceptor then takes the allowable flow to 

the WWTP, while the excess flow is discharged to the nearest waterbody as combined sewer 

overflow (CSO). In the case of the combined sewer on West 30th Street which conveys sanitary 

sewage generated on the Project Site, the regulator controlling flow to the interceptor and outfall 

is located at West 30th Street and Twelfth Avenue (N-45, SPDES Outfall No. 027), which flows 

into the Hudson River. The southern section of the Project Site, between West 30th Street and 

the approximate location of West 31st Street, includes land (“terra firma”) that is not occupied by 

LIRR operations. Stormwater runoff from this area drains by a combination of inlet drains and 

surface flows into street catch basins into the existing combined sewer system within West 30th 

Street. Depending on downstream flows within the interceptor sewer, Regulator N-45 either allows 

this drainage with effluent from other sources entering the regulator to drain into the interceptor 

sewer for treatment at the North River WWTP, or diverts some or all of the flows as a CSO event 

to discharge directly into the Hudson River.

Currently, stormwater collected on the LIRR facilities on the Western Rail Yard is not conveyed to 

the combined sewer. The Western Rail Yard utilizes a stormwater collection system consisting of 

five pipe runs with catch basins, which run primarily perpendicular to the tracks, conveying flow 

from north to south. The five runs connect to a 43-inch x 68-inch reinforced concrete storm sewer 

that runs east-west near the southern boundary of the yard to outfall into the Hudson River (this 

storm sewer also conveys stormwater flow from the Eastern Rail Yard, east of Eleventh Avenue). 

The storm sewer exits the Western Rail Yard near the extension of West 31st Street and Twelfth 

Avenue and runs south under Twelfth Avenue to tie into the outfall at West 30th Street downstream 

of Regulator N-45. Because the tie-in for the LIRR private storm sewer is downstream of the 

regulator chamber, the runoff from the Western Rail Yard has no opportunity to discharge into the 

City combined sewer system, and instead is considered a direct stormwater discharge into the 

Hudson River. The outfall is regulated under the NYSDEC’s General Permit for Stormwater 

Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). LIRR is the permittee for the 

MS4 stormwater discharge from the Western Rail Yard. 
June 2021 13-4 

As part of prior approvals for the Western Rail Yard project, NYCDEP developed an Amended 

Drainage Plan (ADP) for a portion of the Hudson Yards area that includes the area generally 

bounded by Twelfth Avenue (Route 9A) to the west, West 40th Street to the north, West 32nd 

Street to the south, and Tenth Avenue to the east. The ADP identifies improvements to the existing 

storm and combined sewer system infrastructure that are necessary to accommodate the full build 

out of the Hudson Yards area. The ADP identifies replacement of the existing combined sewer in 

West 33rd Street, on the north side of the Project Site, with a separate storm sewer and sanitary 

sewer. The new storm sewer along the West 33rd Street would divert existing stormwater runoff 

from the combined sewer system. NYCDEP has designed the sewers proposed by the ADP of an

adequate size to handle the flows that would be discharged from the Project Site as well as the 

adjacent Hudson Yards area. 

13.4.4 SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES

DSNY is the agency responsible for the collection and disposal of residential and institutional solid 

waste in New York City, while private carters collect solid waste from commercial and 

manufacturing uses. In addition to collecting municipal solid waste, refuse, and designated 

recyclable materials generated by residential and institutional uses (including schools, some 

nonprofit institutions, and many city and state agencies), DSNY also collects waste from city litter 

baskets, street-sweeping operations, and lot cleaning activities. The DSNY collection fleet is 

composed of over 2,100 waste collection trucks, with the typical collection truck for refuse carrying 

approximately 12.5 tons of waste material and the typical recycling truck carrying about 11.5 tons 

of paper or approximately 10.0 tons of metal, glass, and plastic containers. In total, DSNY collects 

approximately 9,680 tons per day of residential and institutional refuse and approximately 2,120 

tons per day of recyclables.

2

2 “DSNY Annual Report; New York City Municipal Refuse and Recycling Statistics: Fiscal Year 2018,” 

https://dsny.cityofnewyork.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/about_dsny-non-dsny-collections-FY2018.pdf

 

Commercial establishments (e.g., restaurants, retail facilities, offices, and industries) in New York 

City contract with private carters for collection and processing and/or disposal of various kinds of 

solid waste, including municipal solid waste construction and demolition debris, non-hazardous 

industrial wastes, and recyclables. According to the CEQR Technical Manual, commercial carters 

typically carry between 12 and 15 tons of waste material per truck. Private carting companies 

collect the approximately 13,000 tons of refuse generated each day by the City’s businesses. As 

the only user currently on the Project Site is LIRR, and there are currently no residential or 

institutional users on the Project Site, solid waste generated on the Project Site is handled by 

private carters. Approximately four tons per week of solid waste are generated by LIRR operations

at the Project Site. 

Under New York City’s mandatory Recycling Law (Title 16 of the NYC Administrative Code, 

Chapter 3), DSNY has established and enforces rules requiring that certain designated recyclable 

materials be separated from household waste for separate collection. New York City residents are 

required to separate aluminum foil, glass, plastic, and metal containers, and newspapers and other

paper waste from household waste for separate collection. Commercial establishments are also 

subject to mandatory recycling requirements. Businesses must source-separate certain types of 

paper waste, cardboard, metal items, and construction wastes. Food and beverage 

establishments must recycle metal, glass, and plastic containers, and aluminum foil, in addition to 

meeting the commercial recycling requirements. 
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-5 June 2021

DSNY delivers most of the refuse it collects to certain public or private solid waste management

facilities known as transfer stations in the City or in adjoining communities for processing and 

transporting to out-of-city disposal facilities. Solid wastes that are not recycled, reused, or 

converted to a useful product locally must be exported from the City for disposal because New 

York City does not have public or private local disposal facilities such as sanitary landfills, 

construction and demolition debris landfills, traditional incinerators, or waste-to-energy resources 

recovery facilities. Similarly, commercial refuse and other solid waste that is not carted directly to 

disposal facilities are delivered to transfer stations for transport to disposal facilities. Nonputrescible waste such as construction and demolition debris typically is sorted at transfer stations, 

which remove clean fill materials, metal, and wood for recycling, and send the residue to landfills 

for disposal. 

As New York City has no public or private local disposal facilities, solid wastes that are not 

recycled, reused, or converted to a useful product locally must be exported from the City for 

disposal. Designated recyclable materials are delivered to privately operated materials recovery 

facilities (MRFs) in the City and surrounding communities. Paper recyclables collected by DSNY 

in Manhattan, Staten Island, and parts of Brooklyn are transported directly to the Pratt Industries 

Paper Plant in Staten Island, which processes them for use in the production of liner board and 

similar products. 

As required by New York State Law, the City has adopted a comprehensive Solid Waste 

Management Plan (SWMP) for the long-term management of solid waste generated within its 

borders. The current SWMP was adopted in 2006 and covers the period through 2025. It is 

anticipated that City will amend the current plan after 2025 to build on the ongoing programs to 

prevent, reuse, recycle, and compost waste, pursuant to the requirements of the New York State 

Solid Waste Management Act. The SWMP estimates public- and private-sector waste quantities 

that must be managed over the planning period and identifies processing, transfer, and disposal 

capacity that will be necessary for such waste. According to the SWMP, the City’s commercial 

solid waste generation is projected to increase to approximately 74,000 tons per week by the year 

2025.3

3 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2006; Attachment IV, Table IV 2-2.

The amount of DSNY-managed waste is projected to increase to approximately 115,830 

tons per week.4

4 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, September 2006; Attachment II, Table II 2-6.

 

The SWMP takes into account the objectives of New York State’s solid waste management policy 

with respect to the preferred hierarchy of waste management methods, in order of preference: 

waste reduction, recycling, composting, resource conservation and energy production, and landfill 

disposal. The SWMP includes initiatives and programs for waste minimization, reuse, recycling, 

composting, and siting a new waste conversion facility to derive energy from waste, waste transfer, 

transport, and out-of-city disposal at waste-to-energy facilities and landfills. With respect to 

commercial waste, the SWMP provides the capacity for barge export of certain amounts of 

commercial refuse from four converted DSNY marine transfer stations (MTSs); provides for barge 

export of construction and demolition waste from the existing DSNY MTSs at West 59th Street; 

and requires rail export of commercial refuse from the three private transfer stations that also 

contract to handle DSNY refuse. The SWMP also includes more stringent restrictions on the siting 

and operation of commercial solid waste transfer stations.
June 2021 13-6 

13.4.5 ENERGY 

Within New York City, electricity is generated and delivered to most users by Con Edison, as well 

as a number of independent power companies. Electrical energy in New York City is drawn from 

a variety of sources that originate both within and outside the City. These include non-renewable 

sources (such as oil, natural gas, and coal fuel) and renewable sources (such as hydroelectricity 

and, to a much lesser extent, biomass fuels, solar power, and wind power). Electricity consumed 

in New York City is generated in various locations, including sites within New York City, locations 

across the Northeast, and places as far away as Canada.

Con Edison distributes power throughout New York City and Westchester County. Transmission 

substations receive electricity from the regional high voltage transmission system and reduce the 

voltage to a level that can be delivered to area substations. Area substations further reduce the 

voltage to a level that can be delivered to the distribution system, or the street “grid.” Within the 

grid, voltage is further reduced for delivery to customers. Each substation serves one or more 

distinct geographic areas, called networks, which are isolated from the rest of the local distribution 

system. If service is lost at a specific substation or substations, the network functions to isolate 

any problems from other parts of the city. Substations are also designed to have sufficient capacity 

for the network to grow.

In 2019 (the latest year for which data are available), approximately 55 billion kilowatt hours 

(KWH), or 188 trillion BTUs of electricity were delivered in Con Edison’s service area. In addition, 

Con Edison supplied approximately 179 trillion BTUs of natural gas and approximately 20 billion 

pounds of steam, which is equivalent to approximately 21 trillion BTUs.5

5 Consolidated Edison Annual Report, 2019.

Overall, approximately 

388 trillion BTUs of energy are consumed within Con Edison’s New York City and Westchester 

County service area annually.

On the Project Site, the existing Western Rail Yard consumes electric power for rail traction power, 

signal and communications systems, electrical requirement for nighttime yard lighting, and 

operation of buildings and maintenance operations within the yard. Connections to the Con Edison

grid system supplies power to the existing yard; the site contains underground alternating current 

(AC) ducts, which provide power for lighting and other yard systems, and underground direct 

current (DC) ducts, which feed the traction power system throughout the yard.6 As rail yard is 

currently open, there are no mechanical cooling or ventilation requirements within the rail yard 

excluding the existing buildings. 

6 The DC feed is routed from the underground ducts to various points in the yard where they then come 

above ground to terminate to a feeder rail that is then used to supply power to the “third rail.”

13.5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

13.5.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

The existing use of the rail yard and associated LIRR facilities, as well as their maintenance 

regimen would continue under the No Action Alternative. Therefore, FRA’s analyses considered

the demands that existing uses on the Project Site currently place on the utility infrastructure and 

services in the area. In addition to the LIRR train yard, the Project Site currently contains four 

buildings which provide space for LIRR support services, including equipment storage, offices, 

and staff locker rooms. The Emergency Services Building contains emergency electrical 

equipment. In total, these buildings contain approximately 19,100 sf of space. In the No Action 

Alternative, the existing LIRR support buildings on the Project Site would remain in their current 

location, condition and operations. LIRR would continue maintaining these buildings.
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-7 June 2021

13.5.1.1 WATER SUPPLY

As noted above, existing water consumption at the Project Site is primarily related to LIRR 

operations within the Western Rail Yard, and an internal water distribution piping network 

connected to an NYCDEP water main in Twelfth Avenue serves the existing LIRR facilities on the 

Project Site. Water consumption from these existing uses in the No Action Alternative were

estimated based on the approximate square footage of the four LIRR buildings currently in 

operation utilizing the rates presented in the CEQR Technical Manual. For purposes of analysis, 

based on the general use of the buildings for LIRR staff and operations, FRA assumed that the 

facilities generate water consumption at the rates of commercial office space. New York City has 

a comprehensive water conservation program to reduce water use through water metering and 

requirements that plumbing fixtures meet low-flow criteria in existing and new buildings (Local Law 

No. 29, 1989). The CEQR Technical Manual usage rates reflect the effects of Local Law No. 29.

As shown in Table 13-1, FRA estimated that the existing uses on the Project Site currently 

consume approximately 5,157 gallons per day (gpd), including approximately 1,910 gpd for 

domestic uses and approximately 3,247 gpd for air conditioning.

Table 13-1 

No Action Alternative Water Consumption and Sanitary Sewage 

Use Size/Population Rate* Consumption (gpd)

Domestic 19,100 sf 0.10 gpd/sf 1,910

Air Conditioning 19,100 sf 0.17 gpd/sf 3,247

Total Water Supply Demand 5,157

Total Sewage Generation 1,910

Note: * Rates are from the CEQR Technical Manual Table 13-2; existing LIRR facilities assumed to 

generate water demand and sanitary sewage at the rates of commercial office space for purposes of 

analysis. 

13.5.1.2 WASTEWATER 

As noted above, an internal sanitary sewer system, which discharges to the NYCDEP sewer 

system in West 30th Street, serves the Project Site. FRA estimated the volume of sanitary sewage 

as corresponding to all water demand generated by the existing LIRR facilities (approximately 

19,100 sf) except water used by air conditioning, which is typically not discharged to the sewer 

system. As shown in Table 13-1, FRA estimated the volume of daily sanitary sewage generated 

by the existing facilities in the No Action Alternative as 1,910 gpd.

13.5.1.3 STORMWATER

As in existing conditions, stormwater collected on the Western Rail Yard in the No Action 

Alternative would be conveyed to the Hudson River as direct discharge through the storm sewer, 

which runs through the site and ties into the NYCDEP outfall at West 30th Street downstream of 

Regulator N-45. Therefore, in the No Action Alternative, no stormwater collected on this portion of 

the Project Site would be discharged to the combined sewer system. However, the terra firma

portion of the Project Site would continue to drain into the combined sewer system within West 

30th Street in the No Action Alternative.

Independent of the Preferred Alternative, the City is undertaking a project to reconstruct the West 

33rd Street viaduct; this reconstruction project is expected to upgrade the utilities in the street, 

including constructing the new separated sanitary and stormwater sewers proposed by the ADP

(discussed above). Therefore, under the No Action Alternative, there is expected to be a storm 

sewer in West 33rd Street in addition to the LIRR storm sewer on the Project Site. 
June 2021 13-8 

13.5.1.4 SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES

In the No Action Alternative, there would continue to be approximately four tons of solid waste 

generated by LIRR operations on the Project Site per week, which would continue to be handled 

by private carters.

13.5.1.5 ENERGY

FRA estimated energy consumption from the existing LIRR facilities in the No Action Alternative 

based on the approximate square footage of the existing LIRR buildings currently in operation 

utilizing the rates presented in the CEQR Technical Manual. The estimate utilized the energy 

consumption rate of commercial office space (216,300 BTUs/sf/year) as defined in Table 15-1 of 

the CEQR Technical Manual. This estimate excluded energy consumption for the traction power 

system serving the LIRR yard on the Project Site, which would not be affected by the Preferred 

Alternative. Therefore, as detailed in Table 13-2, the energy consumption on the Project Site in 

the No Action Alternative is approximately 4,131 million BTUs per year.

Table 13-2 

No Action Alternative Energy Consumption

Use Size

Average Annual Energy Rate 

(Thousand BTUs/sf/year)*

Energy Consumption 

(Thousand BTUs/Year)

LIRR Facilities 19,100 sf 216.3 4,131,330

Note: * Rates are from the CEQR Technical Manual Table 15-1; existing LIRR facilities assumed to 

consume energy at the rates of commercial office space for purposes of analysis, excluding energy 

consumption for the traction power system.

13.5.2 OPERATIONAL IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

FRA’s analyses considered the additional demands that operation of the Preferred Alternative 

would place on the utility infrastructure and services in the area of the Project Site. As discussed 

in Chapter 3, Platform construction would result in the existing LIRR service buildings being 

replaced with modernized buildings without change to function or footprint. The new electrical 

substation building would contain the Con Edison service connection and its associated electrical 

equipment, the Medium-Voltage Substation (discussed further below), emergency generators for 

the Eastern and Western Rail Yards, an Electrical Distribution Room, Western Rail Yard Fire 

Pump, Fire Protection Valves, Communication Rooms, as well as office and storage spaces.

In total, these three LIRR service buildings would contain approximately 39,422 sf of space, 

approximately 20,300 sf larger than the existing facilities on the Project Site. However, there would 

be no change to LIRR operations, and minimal to no changes in LIRR staffing with the Preferred 

Alternative. 

13.5.2.1 WATER SUPPLY

The Platform and Tunnel Encasement infrastructure would not result in incremental demand for 

potable water (there would be water demand from the LIRR service buildings that would be 

constructed with the Preferred Alternative, discussed below). With the Preferred Alternative, the 

existing fire suppression system for the railyard, which primarily consists of an underground main 

supplying fire hydrants throughout the site, would be abandoned and replaced with an overhead 

fire suppression system incorporated into the Platform; however, this system would only be 

operational during emergencies and would not result in substantial additional demand for water. 
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-9 June 2021

The LIRR service buildings constructed on the Project Site would be supplied by the existing 

mains. As shown in Table 13-3, based on the approximate square footage of the LIRR service 

buildings (which were assumed to generate water consumption at the rates of commercial office 

space), it was estimated that the LIRR facilities would consume approximately 10,644 gpd, 

including approximately 3,942 gpd for domestic uses and approximately 6,702 gpd for air 

conditioning.

Table 13-3 

Preferred Alternative Water Consumption and Sanitary Sewage 

Use Size/Population Rate* Consumption (gpd)

Domestic 39,422 sf 0.10 gpd/sf 3,942

Air Conditioning 39,422 sf 0.17 gpd/sf 6,702

Total Water Supply Demand 10,644

Total Sewage Generation 3,942

Note: * Rates are from the CEQR Technical Manual Table 13-2; LIRR facilities assumed to generate water 

demand and sanitary sewage at the rates of commercial office space for purposes of analysis.

As compared to the No Action Alternative, the Preferred Alternative would result in incremental 

water demand of approximately 5,487 gpd, from the LIRR service buildings. This increment 

represents a minimal increase in demand on the City’s daily water supply of approximately one 

billion gpd, and the existing mains serving the Project Site would have sufficient capacity to support 

the LIRR service buildings. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative would not result in adverse 

impacts on the City’s water supply system. 

13.5.2.2 WASTEWATER 

With the Preferred Alternative, only the LIRR service buildings would result in generation of 

sanitary sewage, as the Platform and Tunnel Encasement infrastructure would not generate 

sanitary sewage. As with the existing buildings, the LIRR service buildings would be connected to 

a sanitary sewer system on the Project Site; in order to accommodate the structural foundations 

and columns to support the Platform, the existing sanitary pipes on the Project Site would be 

relocated where necessary, and the existing pump station would be modified. However, the 

sanitary sewers system on the Project Site would continue to discharge to the NYCDEP combined 

sewer in West 30th Street and conveyed to the North River WWTP.

As shown in Table 13-3, with the Preferred Alternative, FRA estimated the LIRR service buildings 

to generate 3,942 gpd of daily sanitary sewage. As compared to the No Action Alternative, the 

incremental sanitary sewage would be 2,032 gpd. This represented a minimal increase in sewage 

generation to the North River WWTP in comparison to its average monthly flow of 110 mgd, and 

this increase would not result in an exceedance of the WWTP’s permitted capacity of 170 mgd. In 

addition, in accordance with the New York City Plumbing Code (Local Law 33 of 2007), the LIRR 

buildings would be required to utilize low-flow plumbing fixtures, which would reduce sanitary flows 

to the plant. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative would not result in an adverse impact to the City’s 

sanitary sewage conveyance and treatment system.
June 2021 13-10

13.5.2.3 STORMWATER

As discussed above, stormwater currently collected on the Western Rail Yard directly discharges 

to the Hudson River through on-site drainage structures and piping connected to a private storm 

sewer on the Project Site. With the Preferred Alternative, as the Platform would largely cover the 

below-grade track area of the railyard, most stormwater runoff onto the railyard would be largely 

eliminated (runoff of stormwater collected on the Platform is discussed below). However, 

stormwater runoff collection from the Rail Yard would still be required during construction and 

would be managed in accordance with the erosion and sediment control measures identified in 

the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prepared in accordance with the NYSDEC 

SPDES General Permit Number GP-0-20-001 for stormwater discharges from construction 

activity. Stormwater management for runoff created by the Platform area would be regulated by 

NYCDEP under New York City’s SPDES permit for the discharge of stormwater from the municipal 

separate storm sewer systems (MS4). In addition, after the Platform is built, portions of the railyard 

would remain uncovered (a small open area between the Platform and the High Line would 

remain) and minor runoff would still be expected. The drainage system would also be necessary 

to capture water from the fire suppression system (when used). In accordance with the New York 

City Plumbing Code (Section 301.3),7

7 2014 New York City Plumbing Code, Chapter 3, “General Regulations,” Section 301.3, “Connections to 

the Sanitary Drainage System.” (https://up.codes/viewer/new_york_city/nyc-plumbing-code-2014/chapter/

3/general-regulations#3), accessed February 3, 2021.

any water emitted from the new fire suppression system 

would be considered “liquid waste,” which must be discharged directly to the sanitary drainage 

system, per the same plumbing code. Therefore, after the Platform is fully built, the existing storm 

sewers on the Project Site would be diverted to the sanitary sewer system on the Project Site, and 

the existing catch basins would act as floor drains. This would result in a minimal increase in 

stormwater flows to the sanitary sewer discharging to the combined sewer on West 30th Street.8

8 FRA estimated the open area between the Platform and the Highline to be 5,500 sf (0.126 acres), and 

assumed it to be completely paved with a weighted runoff coefficient of 0.85. DEP states that the rate of 

runoff from the site, is calculated using the rational method for the total site area (A, in acres), rainfall 

intensity (i), and the site’s surface coverage, per DEP’s criteria. The rational method uses the following 

formula: Flow (Q) = Runoff Coefficient (C) x Rainfall Intensity (i) x Area (A) or Q=CiA. DEP’s standard 

design practice uses a rainfall intensity of 5.95 in/hr for the event with a five-year return period and a sixminute time of concentration. Based on DEP's criteria, FRA estimated the runoff from the open area to be 

approximately 0.639 cubic feet per second (cfs). 

 
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-11 June 2021

Additional stormwater infrastructure improvements would be constructed with the Preferred 

Alternative in order to support the new structures on the Project Site. On the terra firma portion of 

the Project Site, which would not be covered by the Platform, stormwater would be conveyed to 

the existing LIRR storm sewer.9

9 The RD requires the installation of drainage mechanisms on the southern terra firma portion of the Project 

Site to convey stormwater to the LIRR storm sewer and outfall; the RD allows for, but does not require, 

other portions of the Project Site to be connected to the LIRR sewer, subject to a separate agreement 

between LIRR and the Overbuild Developer. 

As stormwater runoff in this area currently drains into the existing 

combined sewer system within West 30th Street, this modification would result in a reduction of 

flows to the combined sewer and an increase in direct stormwater discharge from the Project Site. 

In addition, stormwater collected on the Platform would be primarily detained on-site for reuse. 

Any overflow of stormwater collected on the Platform would be conveyed to the sewer 

infrastructure in West 33rd Street, north of the Project Site. As noted above, in accordance with 

the ADP, a storm sewer is expected to be constructed by the City independent of the Preferred 

Alternative. Therefore, as with the No Action Alternative, stormwater would generally continue to 

be conveyed as direct discharge to the Hudson River, and there would be minimal incremental 

stormwater flows to the NYCDEP combined sewer system. Under the Preferred Alternative, the 

LIRR sewer, which would convey discharge from the terra firma portion of the Project Site, would 

continue to meet the requirements of its existing MS4 permit for stormwater discharge. Therefore, 

in consideration of the stormwater management improvements that would be made, the Preferred 

Alternative would not result in an adverse impact on the City’s stormwater management 

infrastructure. 

13.5.2.4 SOLID WASTE AND SANITATION SERVICES

As the Preferred Alternative would not alter LIRR staffing or operations on the Western Rail Yard, 

no additional solid waste generation is expected on the Project Site as compared to the No Action 

Alternative. As with current operations, solid waste from the reconstructed LIRR facilities would 

be collected by private carters and would not require service from DSNY. Therefore, the Preferred 

Alternative would not result in an adverse impact to the City’s solid waste collection and disposal 

services.

13.5.2.5 ENERGY

The Preferred Alternative would include construction of a medium-voltage electrical substation, 

which would supply power to the Western Rail Yard’s ventilation system (the ventilation system is 

a required component of the Platform in order to remove the heat and emissions from train 

operations in the Western Rail Yard). 

As shown in Table 13-4, the estimated energy consumption of the LIRR service facilities would 

be approximately 8,526 million BTUs per year. The total incremental energy use between the No 

Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative would be 4,395 million BTUs per year. Compared 

with the approximately 388 trillion BTUs of energy consumed annually within Con Edison’s New 

York City and Westchester County service area, this incremental increase represents a negligible

change. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative would not have any adverse impacts on energy.
June 2021 13-12

Table 13-4 

Preferred Alternative Energy Consumption

Use Size

Average Annual Energy Rate 

(Thousand BTUs/sf/year)*

Energy Consumption 

(Thousand BTUs/Year)

LIRR Service Facilities 39,422 sf 216.3 8,526,979

Notes: * Rates are from the CEQR Technical Manual Table 15-1; proposed LIRR facilities assumed to 

consume energy at the rates of commercial office space for purposes of analysis, excluding energy 

consumption for the traction power system or Platform ventilation system. 

13.5.3 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS OF THE PREFERRED 

ALTERNATIVE

During construction of the Preferred Alternative, the only demand for solid waste disposal service 

would be to dispose of construction debris, which would be accommodated by private solid waste 

carters; no municipal solid waste disposal would be required. The construction of the Tunnel 

Encasement and Platform components of the Preferred Alternative would have little to no demand 

for municipal solid waste and sanitation services associated with them. 

As part of the Preferred Alternative’s construction, which includes installation of structural 

foundations and columns to support the Platform, the Project Sponsor would be required to reroute 

and/or reconstruct portions of the Western Rail Yard’s existing utility infrastructure on the Project 

Site. As discussed below, under “Mitigation,” the Project Sponsor would undertake any necessary 

utility infrastructure rerouting and reconstruction, and make the additional temporary infrastructure 

improvements to maintain service for rail yard operations. 

Construction activities associated with the Preferred Alternative would be limited to the Project 

Site and would not affect any off-site utility infrastructure. In addition, as described above, 

rerouting, reconstruction and/or improvements to the on-site infrastructure would be made in order 

to maintain utility services for rail yard operations as necessary. Therefore, construction of the 

Preferred Alternative would not result in any utility service disruptions and would not result in any 

adverse impacts to utility infrastructure.

13.6 MITIGATION/COMMITMENTS

During construction of the Platform, the Project Sponsor would be required to reroute and/or 

reconstruct portions of the Western Rail Yard’s existing utility infrastructure on the Project Site, 

and would make temporary infrastructure improvements to maintain utility services at the railyard. 

This would include temporary and permanent on-site sewer improvements. As noted above, the 

existing storm sewers on the Project Site would be diverted to the sanitary sewer system to 

accommodate the Platform support piles, and temporary drainage provision (such as pits and 

pumps) would be installed as temporary bypasses if needed during construction to maintain 

stormwater drainage in the rail yard. The existing sanitary sewer system and potable water mains 

would be relocated in order to avoid conflicts with the Platform support piles; however, sanitary 

service and water supply to the rail yard would continue to function during and after construction. 

In addition, the AC duct banks that service the rail yard’s lighting would be removed or abandoned 

during construction of Platform foundations, and the Project Sponsor would provide temporary 

power and lighting system provided to maintain lighting on the rail yard during construction. The 

Project Sponsor would reroute the DC feeders that supply energy to the rail yard’s traction power 

system around foundations in compliance with LIRR practices and standards as needed to avoid 

conflicts with the Platform support piles. 
Chapter 13: Utilities and Energy

13-13 June 2021

The storm sewer currently serving the rail yard would continue to operate following construction 

of the Platform in order to convey stormwater collected on the terra firma portion of the Project 

Site; this sewer operates in accordance with an MS4 permit, and would continue to meet the permit 

requirements (no additional detention and/or onsite treatment measures are required). The 

drainage system in the railyard and on the Platform would be designed to meet all NYCDEP permit 

requirements and would discharge to the NYCDEP sewers adjacent to the Project Site. 