Skip to main content

New school at AY would add 100,000 square feet

There's a curious passage within a Request for Proposals (RFP) from the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) for an Environmental Monitor to oversee construction activities, mitigation measures, and "certain other activities associated with the Atlantic Yards Land Use Improvement and Civic Project."

It reminds us--in a passage that I and others had missed when first announced in November--that the project got a little bigger with the addition of a school.

Given "the projected significant adverse impact to the supply of elementary and intermediate school seats within ½ mile of the Project," developer Forest City Ratner, if requested by the New York City Department of Education (DOE) prior to January 1, 2010, would convey or lease "to allow for the development of an approximately 100,000 gross square foot elementary and intermediate public school." The likely location: Building 5, which would be east of Sixth Avenue between Atlantic Avenue and Pacific Street.

Here's the news:
The space provided for the School shall be in addition to the Atlantic Yards program described in Table S-1 of the FEIS and shall not replace or result in a reduction of any part thereof.
(Emphasis added)

That table, on page 3 of the Executive Summary chapter of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), shows the mixed-use version of the project would be 7,961,000 square feet. The school would boost it to 8,061,000 square feet.

That's an increase of only 1.25 percent. Then again, a projected 6 to 8 percent decrease made the front page of the New York Times, so maybe the school is news. (The decrease, ultimately about 8 percent, had been mostly on the table for months.)

Slipping it in

The increase in the project size was not in the Response to Comments chapter of the FEIS, the new chapter which I and others scourted. It stated, in one passage:
As discussed in Chapter 19, “Mitigation,” if requested by DOE, the project sponsors would make a space available for a school in the base of one of the residential buildings east of 6th Avenue...

However, the Mitigation chapter does offer this new paragraph:
The floor area provided for the school would be in addition to the floor area assumed to be developed under either the reasonable worst-case Residential Mixed-Use Variation or Commercial Mixed-Use Variation as described in Chapter 2, “Procedural and Analytical Framework.” Thus, the provision of a school as part of the proposed project would result in additional floor area to be developed at one or more Phase II development sites. If located in Building 5, the additional floor area is expected to be able to fit within the development envelopes established in the Design Guidelines and in any event would not change the overall height of any building. This additional 100,000 square feet of school space would represent approximately a 1.25 percent increase to the reduced FEIS program; this total program size, however, would still be less than the program analyzed in the DEIS.

In other words, because the project had been reduced a bit, the increase doesn't matter much.

Who pays for traffic agents?

The RFP sets up the possibility that the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) and the developer might not agree on who pays for traffic enforcement agents at arena events, leaving the ESDC as the arbiter.

It states:
FCRC shall enter into discussions with NYCDOT to determine the extent of FCRC’s financial responsibility for the traffic enforcement agents (“TEAs”) required to manage traffic flow for major arena events and shall comply with the terms of any such agreement with NYCDOT as required by the DOT letter. If necessary to ensure that the TEAs are deployed for major arena events as described in the FEIS, and only in the event that FCRC and NYCDOT do not reach a funding agreement, FCRC shall provide such funding for TEAs as ESDC shall reasonably direct, considering funding arrangements at other sports and entertainment venues in New York City.

In the Response to Comments chapter of the FEIS, the ESDC had been vague about who would pay and how much (see final page):
It is anticipated that on days when a basketball game or other major event is scheduled at the arena, police or traffic control officers would be deployed at key locations to maintain traffic flow and minimize conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians, as is standard practice at many major event venues in the City. The project sponsor is committed to working with DOT and NYPD to ensure that needed resources are available for this purpose.

Environmental monitor

The RFP states that during the construction period, the developer would pay "the reasonable costs of an environmental monitor" to:
(i) monitor FCRC’s compliance with certain provisions of this memorandum; (ii) review any submittals made by FCRC pursuant to such provisions and advise ESDC with respect thereto; and (iii) provide ESDC with periodic written reports concerning FCRC’s implementation of such provisions. The certain provisions referred to in the preceding sentence are paragraphs: E (with respect to protection of cultural resources near the project site from being impacted by construction on the project site); G.2 (pertaining to Hazardous Materials); I.9 (pertaining to reviewing the effectiveness of any modified design for stormwater management facilities); J.2 (pertaining to reviewing alternative fuels or boiler technologies); J.4 (pertaining to reviewing the location of HVAC intakes in the event that the design of the relevant Project buildings changes from the design subject to air dispersion modeling in the FEIS); K.6 (pertaining to decisionmaking with respect to the funding of TEAs in the event that FCRC and NYCDOT do not reach agreement on this issue); L.2 (pertaining to the adjustment of demand management measures); and N.1, N.2.d, N.2.e, N.2.f, N.3.b, N.3.c, N.3.d, N.3.f, N.4, N.5, N.6 and N.7 (pertaining to construction). The obligation set forth in this paragraph shall cease upon completion of the Phase II buildings.

What about the CBA?

There's no mention in the RFP about the Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) and signatory Brooklyn Endeavor Experience, which has apparently not set up a Committee on Environmental Assurances to "address short and long term environmental issues."

As noted, the CBA’s environmental committee is limited to the construction phase, but the CBA is toothless. The developer would comply with the agreement “by following the state mandated process.” So much for the historic, legally-binding CBA.


Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…