Skip to main content

Is the New Domino AY the sequel? Not with ULURP, but...

So, would the $1 billion, 11.2-acre New Domino project in Williamsburg really be an echo of Atlantic Yards? On the one hand, as I wrote, the fundamental issue is whether a developer can get a zoning change (ND) or zoning override (AY) to increase the value of development rights. And affordable housing is being used to justify the scale of the development and generate support from some neighborhood groups.

On the other, the New Domino will go through the city's land use review process, which involves much more public scrutiny than the Empire State Development Corporation's fast-track process. Also, there would be deeper affordability, the preservation of a historic structure, and the open space plan, offering connections to the Williamsburg waterfront, likely wouldn't seem like the private enclave feared at the Atlantic Yards site.

[updated] But there's one crucial consistency: in both cases we're asked to take on faith that the project should be as big as proposed, without seeing the developer's expected return.

A pre-ULURP meeting

Given the greater need for community input and approval, that's why representatives of affordable housing developer CPC Resources (CPCR, the for-profit arm of the nonprofit Community Preservation Corporation, or CPC), the controlling partner that owns the former Domino Sugar factory site, appeared Tuesday night before Brooklyn Community Board 1's ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure) Committee.

They answered--or, in some cases, not quite answered--some cordial but often challenging questions from community members. About 75 people attended the meeting, held at the Swinging Sixties Senior Center on Ainslie Street, in a more placid segment of the Williamsburg two stops east on the L train.

(The official New Domino web site so far offers renderings, as at top, with little context for the tallest buildings, two 300 feet and two 400 feet. A site set up by community members concerned about the project, DominoSugar.org, offers views with more context, such as this perspective from Grand Street, right. That's not to say that other views of the waterfront don't show large buildings. Northside Piers is pretty big, but the development on the northside waterfront is not nearly as extensive as that proposed for the New Domino, just north of the Williamsburg Bridge.)

The meeting Tuesday was preliminary to ULURP, which likely would begin next year and last some seven months, involving at least two public hearings, an advisory vote by the Community Board and the Borough President, and votes by the City Planning Commission and the City Council.

By contrast, Atlantic Yards developer Forest City Ratner didn't have to answer questions before community boards, though an entourage made a one-night sweep of the three affected community boards to offer testimony in August 2006 during the period of environmental review, and point man Jim Stuckey did answer some written questions at a raucous (but allegedly packed and without city or state involvement) 11/29/04 informational meeting sponsored by the three CBs. And there was that highly contentious meeting, in March 2004, sponsored by the Park Slope Civic Council, the only time a representative of Frank Gehry's office participated.

Some constraints

On Tuesday, CPCR's project manager, VP Susan M. Pollock, was joined by project team members, including architects and a landscape architect, as well as in-house staffers, p.r. people, lobbyists, and a lawyer. (The p.r.firm Geto & de Milly has also worked for Forest City Ratner, as has the ubiquitous environmental consulting firm AKRF.)

She described the project as an effort to create the most affordable housing given the constraints of the site and other costs. The cost of preserving the 250' x 144' refinery building, which has been landmarked, is considerable; a new interior structure must be created, with a 60' x 100' courtyard carved out to supply light and air. The building also would offer community facility space, retail space on Kent Avenue, and parking below grade.

Also, because the income range of the promised affordable units (30% of the 2200 units) stretches lower than in many other projects, market-rate units would cross-subsidize the affordable ones, along with city subsidies.

And that's why the developer seeks significantly increased development rights for the "upland site," a nearly one-block parcel east of Kent Avenue in a former parking lot, creating buildings that could go up to 140 feet tall, at bottom in image (right) from New Domino site.

They want to transfer 190,000 square feet of development rights--a good-sized tower--from the waterfront site to the upland site. The site would have a floor area ratio (FAR) of 6.0, significantly higher than the 3.6 FAR allowed via the recent rezoning of other parts of the neighborhood and also the existing FAR of 2.0 for a heavy manufacturing district.

While residents in the audience expressed general sympathy with the goals of the project, some were sharply critical of the details. Steven Frankel questioned the density of the upland parcel, wondering if it would set a precedent for future requests for zoning variances.

(Image with building heights from DominoSugar.org. The web site for now does not identify the people responsible for it.)

Pollock said no. With the exception of "two towers that are taller," she said, the upland segment shouldn't feel out of scale. "I don't feel it sets a precedent," she said, because other upland projects likely would not offer the justification of affordable housing and thus not get a zoning variance. (Well, maybe. Quadriad is already asking for a density bonus in exchange for affordable housing on a project farther from the waterfront.)

What cost, what profit?

The size of the project relates to the costs of the project, and the ambitious goals, proponents said. "We think this density is necessary to make it work, on an economic basis," said Mark Levine, an attorney for the project.

That begged a fundamental question I got to ask: what does "make it work" mean in terms of expected profit? Does CPCR expect a 5%, 10%, or 20% return? Pollock wouldn't give a number, but said "we have been pushed to the limit," noting that CPCR typically runs through complicated financial models to figure out how much affordable housing it can develop.

As with other projects, she added, the project must work for investors and to gain financing. Therein lies the black box; unlike, say, with the stated (but unmet) requirement that Forest City Ratner provide a pro forma statement of expected profits when it bid for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Vanderbilt Yard, the developer of the New Domino need not produce such estimates. [Updated] Only after approval were some ambiguous documents released regarding the projected rates of return, though they still didn't specify the developer's profits.]

And CPCR, for which this project is an ambitious stretch in terms of new construction (it has managed the large-scale revamp of the Parkchester development and has a significant track record in Williamsburg), is not working just for itself or another nonprofit entity. In the case of the New Domino, the silent partner is Isaac Katan, a Brooklyn developer known for aggressive, out-scale development in places like the South Slope.

So even if CPCR is not bound to maximize its own return, it still may be contractually required to deliver a profit beyond its usual return. (Katan gets very short shrift in publicity material for the project.)

AY redux?

Project critics point to the New Domino as the second largest project after Atlantic Yards, and the comparison came up on Tuesday. Stephanie Eisenberg, a vocal critic of the project, asked Pollock a leading question: "People are calling the New Domino 'Atlantic Yards the sequel;' how do you respond to that?"

"I don't think that's valid, but I don't want to be dragged into that," Pollock responded. Without making any reference to Atlantic Yards, she added that CPCR has made "a sincere, wholehearted effort" to work with the community.

Pollock, who has a longstanding background in affordable housing, comes off as less slick than former AY point man Stuckey in representing a giant project that mixes market-rate and affordable units; Stuckey's track record is more rooted in developing mega-projects and office space, and Forest City Ratner had previously not developed housing.

No one wants to be compared with Atlantic Yards, apparently. Still, CPCR has taken a page out of the mega-developer book; they recently ran an advertisement in local weeklies touting a poll in which Williamsburg residents said they supported increased density if it resulted in greater affordability.

That's not surprising, but the details would be intriguing. However, the questions and answers are not yet available; CPCR has promised an exclusive to one news outlet, which has not yet published its story.

Transportation questions

CPCR touts a new water taxi stop and shuttle bus to deal with new transportation demands posed by at least 4500 new residents, but Teresa Toro, chair of CB1's Transportation Committee, said she didn't think that was enough.

Toro suggested that the developer partner with a car-sharing service and would have to ensure that pathways to the water taxi stop, across the truck route of Kent Avenue, would be safe.

Pollock said CPCR would consider car-sharing and other improvements. "We are trying to do what we can," she said. "We can't solve the city's transportation problem."

She also said the developer has "a tremendous interest" in preserving the old Domino sign, but "we're not ready to make a full commitment; we don't know where it's going yet."

No crystal ball

Levine said the affordable housing would be made enforceable through contractual language known as restrictive declarations. However, he allowed that some details regarding the project could change.

"This is going to be built over eight years," he said. "Nobody's smart enough to know the market over time."

In that statement, he was a little more candid than those representing Atlantic Yards, who, though they express to investment analysts generic qualms about predicting the future, have persisted in insisting that the project would take ten years and the arena would open in 2009. (Well, on the latter, there's finally some movement.)

Comments

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…

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…

Former ESDC CEO Lago returns to NYC to head City Planning Commission

Carl Weisbrod, Mayor Bill de Blasio's City Planning Commission Chairman and Director of the Department of City Planning, is resigning,

And he's being replaced by Marisa Lago, currently a federal official, but who Atlantic Yards-ologists remember as the short-term Empire State Development Corporation CEO who, in an impolitic but candid 2009 statement, acknowledged that the project would take "decades."

Still, Lago not long after that played the good soldier at a May 2009 Senate oversight hearing, justifying changes in the project but claiming the public benefits remained the same.

By returning to City Planning, Lago will join former ESDC General Counsel Anita Laremont, who after retiring from the state (and taking a pension) got the job with the city.

Back at planning

Lago, a lawyer, in 1983 began work as an aide to City Planning Chairman Herb Sturz, and later served as the General Counsel to the president of the NYC Economic Development Corporation, Weisbrod himself.