Skip to main content

Read the fine print: ESDC gives Ratner 6+ years to build arena, 12+ years for Phase One

How long might Atlantic Yards be stalled? In the New York Times's coverage Friday of the Atlantic Yards stall, developer Bruce Ratner would "not specify the kinds of delays possible, but suggested that construction could be put off for years."

The Times apparently didn't check with the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), but the state agency has been talking out of both sides of its mouth.

The General Project Plan, approved in December 2006 by the ESDC, stated (right) that Phase 1 of the project was "anticipated to be completed by 2010" and Phase II was "anticipated to be completed by 2016." However, nine months later, in September 2007, the ESDC signed a funding agreement that gives developer Forest City Ratner much more time and also posits a scenario in which much less housing and open space would be built.

The details:
  • Ratner would have six years to build the arena after the close of litigation and the ESDC's exercise of eminent domain to acquire needed properties.

  • Ratner would have 12 years to build the five towers of Phase I after the close of litigation and the ESDC's exercise of eminent domain to acquire needed properties.

  • Ratner would have an unspecified amount of time to build the eleven towers of Phase II, with an option for the ESDC to buy back the land from the developer.

  • Should the project be abandoned, the city might pursue a plan that would bring 1845 units of housing 646 of them affordable, and 2 acres of open space, as opposed to 6430 units, 2250 of them affordable, and 8 acres of open space.
The State Funding Agreement

I first spotted the State Funding Agreement on the ESDC's Atlantic Yards site on Saturday; I'm told it was uploaded on Friday, after the news broke.

It's chopped up into 37 parts. "This large document is divided into subsections for easier downloading," the ESDC states, but it's not that easy to read: the subsections lack headings and the document is a scanned PDF, which means you can't search the text.

[Note that the document (see Part 6) is signed by an ESDC representative but not a Forest City Ratner one. I assume that it was ultimately signed by FCR; otherwise, why was it posted?]

The document makes reference to a "City Funding Agreement," which I assume covers the $205 million so far pledged by the city. That document has yet to surface publicly, though City Council Member David Yassky has requested it. Given the presence of the state document, the city counterpart should be available. [Update: see April 30 post.]

The Effective Date

Key to the document is a term known as the Effective Date, the date on which all litigation... shall have been sufficiently concluded so as to permit such financing and construction to proceed.... [and] ESDC has acquired and delivered vacant possession of the Project Site.

In other words, the Effective Date is several months, if not longer, down the road, given that an appeal in the state case challenging the environmental review won't be heard until September and plaintiffs are making a long-shot appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court of the dismissal of the eminent domain case.

Presumably, if the Supreme Court does not accept the appeal, and other cases regarding tenants in the footprint are resolved, the ESDC could proceed with condemnation. But financing might not be available until all the lawsuits are cleared.

Arena construction: 6+ years

The key timeline issues are in Part 33. How long does Forest City Ratner have to build the arena? The document states:
Developer or its Affiliates shall commence construction on the Arena within one year after the Effective Date Subject to up to four years of delay resulting from Force Majeure events or material adverse changes affecting the financing of the Arena... Developer or its Affiliates shall complete construction of the Arena within six years of the Effective Date, subject to Force Majeure.

And what are the remedies? To pay back [updated] an unspecified portion of the $100 million in state funding and to pay Liquidated Damages to the city as set forth in the City Funding Agreement, a document that has yet to be made public.

Phase I timetable: 12+ years

How long would Forest City Ratner have for the rest of Phase I, the four buildings on the arena block and the tower on Site 5, between Atlantic, Fourth, and Flatbush avenues and Pacific Street?

The document states:
Developer or its Affiliates shall complete the construction of Buildings 1-4 and Site 5, and related affordable housing and infrastructure, (collectively, "Phase 1") within twelve years of the Effective Date, subject to Force Majeure.

Again, a failure to complete the construction means the developer would have to pay back [updated] an unspecified portion ofthe money advanced as well as pay those not-yet-public Liquidated Damages.

Phase II timetable: unspecified

How long would the developer have to build the additional eleven towers? The document states:
Developer or its Affiliates shall complete the construction of Buildings 5-15 on the blocks east of 6th Avenue, and related affordable housing and infrastructure, (collectively, "Phase 2"), subject to Force Majeure, by a date to be established in the Project Documentation, which date will take into account the need for satisfaction of Governmental Authorities' obligations to the Project, (the "Final Deadline").

If Developer or its Affiliates fails to complete the balance of Phase 2 by the Final Deadline, subject to Force Majeure and subject to Governmental Authorities making available to the Project affordable housing subsidies then customarily available to developers of such housing, ESDC shall have an option to purchase Developer's or its Affiliates' interest in the parcels not yet developed pursuant to the GPP, as it may be amended. Such option to purchase shall be pursuant to terms negotiated in the Project Documentation and shall provide for a purchase price equal to the Developer's or its Affiliates' cost and land carrying cost, adjusted for inflation.

Final Deadline

Note that the Final Deadline will be established in project documentation that has not yet been completed. The Times reported:
[Ratner] has been working with Avi Schick, chief executive of the Empire State Development Corporation, to complete all the documents for the project this summer, so that the state can start and finish condemnation by the end of the year.

A smaller alternative

The document (see Part 25) makes reference to a "City Purpose Covenant" that would govern not just Forest City Ratner but any future owners of the premises. It offers the possibility of a significantly smaller project.

It sets out a hierarchy of uses for the "Premises," with the Project, "as set forth in the GPP [General Project Plan]" as the priority.

However, if the GPP is abandoned, the site would be used for not less than 1845 units of housing, of which 35 percent shall be Affordable Housing... and not less than 1.98 acres of environmentally sustainable publicly accessible open space.

Note that 35 percent of 1845 would be 646 affordable housing units. Why such a smaller project and so much less open space? That's unclear, but it seems likely that it would not involve demapping Pacific Street to create a superblock in Phase II.

If the stall continues

What if lawsuits continue to stall the project and the ESDC does not complete condemnations? If the Effective Date does not occur prior to December 19, 2009 and Forest City Ratner fails to pursue the site litigation or take "reasonable steps" in furtherance of the project, it "will be deemed abandoned," and the ESDC will get its money back.

Is that a good deal for Forest City Ratner? It's worthy of discussion.

Remedies for Abandonment

What are the remedies if Forest City Ratner wants to walk away? The document states that if FCR abandons the project before the Effective Date--before litigation is closed--the developer would have to pay back the ESDC the "Required Amount."

The Required Amount

What's the "Required Amount"? The state payments, plus interest, plus Liquidated Damages.

Again, we don't know what those Liquidated Damages are. It's time to see the City Funding Agreement. [Updated: Here it is.]


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…