Skip to main content

Right of way: ESDC letter warns AY footprint tenants/owners that relocation consultant will be knocking on the door

Tenants and property owners in the Atlantic Yards footprint have received letters from the law firm Berger & Webb, which represents the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) in its pursuit of eminent domain, telling them it'll be time to move soon.

One complication: the letter offers only services of a real estate agent and a modest $5000 stipend for residential services, not mentioning the offer by Forest City Ratner--which was part of the General Project Plan (GPP) and Modified General Project Plan--to those in residence for at least one year to "return and to rent a comparable unit within the Project Site at a comparable rate to what they are currently paying."

The absence of an offer to relocate tenants into the project--as state law recommends but does not ensure--prompted a protest by George Locker, who represents eight rent-stabilized residential tenants in the project footprint and has filed a number of lawsuits on their behalf.

(Click on all graphics to enlarge)

ESDC response

But Empire State Development Corporation spokesman Warner Johnston said, "The letter is just intended to alert occupants that representatives of The Cornerstone Group, our relocation consultant, will be in the neighborhood and contacting them soon, and it includes the basic parameters of the relocation assistance that ESDC is providing (essentially verbatim from the General Project Plan), such as referrals to alternative housing, provision of moving services, etc. The General Project Plan also references some additional assistance that FCRC has been and will continue to provide for residential tenants, such as relocating residents back on the Project Site as soon as feasible (if that's what residents desire) and providing interim rent subsidies. The referrals to alternative housing to be provided by Cornerstone (mentioned in the letters of introduction) will include coordination with FCRC as necessary with respect to this assistance."

From the letter

The letter states, in part:
Beginning shortly, representatives from ESDC's relocations firm Cornerstone Group Real Estate Services ("Cornerstone") will start conducting initial visits with each occupant in the affected buildings in order to introduce themselves and to briefly explain the relocation advisory services and relocation assistance that they will provide.

Cornerstone will interview you to determine your space and location requirements and concentrate on identifying suitable replacement space for our consideration. Cornerstone will be your point of contact for issues associated with finding potential relocation sites and will facilitate discussions with the brokers and/or the landlords of these sites on your behalf. In addition, Cornerstone will process claims for moving costs and reestablishment expenses.

Cornerstone looks forward to meeting with you and working with you to provide all available relocation assistance and benefits to achieve a smooth relocation for you.


Who's Cornerstone?

Cornerstone, which has a placeholder web site (listed here), is a member of the International Right of Way Association (IRWA).

About IRWA:
Since its inception as a not-for-profit association in 1934, IRWA has united the efforts of its members toward professional development, improved service to employers and the public, and advancements within the right of way profession. IRWA is the unsurpassed source of right of way educational programs and professional services worldwide.

IRWA includes "multi-disciplined professionals employed by private industry and government agencies": acquisition agents; appraisers; environment professionals; engineers; lawyers; property managers; relocation assistance agents; surveyors; and title experts.

The relocation offer

The letter states:
Referrals to alternative housing will be provided to displaced residential occupants. Cornerstone will meet with the Project's residential occupants to assesstheir particular housing needs and to assist them in finding replacement housing. Real estate brokerage services will be made available at no charge to the occupants.

Moving services and expenses will be provided. This will include payment for the costof the physical move, including the cost of transporting personal property to thereplacement housing location, labor and material, insurance and storage as necessary ("Moving Costs"). ESDC or Cornerstone will bid out all moves and selectthe lowest reasonable and responsible bid. The occupant either may use the selected mover or may conduct a "self-move" and receive the amount of money that ESDC would otherwise have paid to the selected mover. No Moving Costs will be paid until the premises are vacated. Moving Costs will be uncapped as to amount.

A relocation assistance payment will be made to each vacating occupant. A one-time payment of $5,000 per household will be made available to each vacating residential occupant or family to assist in meeting additional expenses encountered in establishing new living quarters, such as telephone and other utility hook-up charges, new return address labels, etc. This stipend is also intended to compensate occupants for the inconvenience of having to move, and to encourage them to vacate their units as quickly as possible.


(Commercial tenants would get up to $20,000 to re-establish their businesses, a sum that, for some businesses, wouldn't go very far.)

What's missing

The new letter, however, lacks this language from the GPP:
The above described residential relocation program is the minimum assistance that will be provided. The Project Sponsors have entered into a Community Benefits Agreement whereby they agreed to provide certain enhanced benefits to occupants who were in occupancy of their residence for at least one year. Such benefits include the right to return and to rent a comparable unit within the Project Site at a comparable rate to what they are currently paying.

Locker complained that the letter did not match the statutory requirements of the New York Urban Development Corporation (UDC) Act, which states:
(g) in the case of all projects, that there is a feasible method for the relocation of families and individuals displaced from the project area into decent, safe and sanitary dwellings, which are or will be provided in the project area or in other areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities, at rents or prices within the financial means of such families or individuals, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Insofar as is feasible, the corporation shall offer housing accommodations to such families and individuals in residential projects of the corporation. The corporation may render to business and commercial tenants and to families or other persons displaced from the project area, such assistance as it may deem necessary to enable them to relocate.
(Emphases added)

Grounds for challenge?

Locker complained that ESDC is required to offer residential condemnees displaced by the Atlantic Yards Project relocation into the completed Atlantic Yards Project and interim rental housing into affordable and desirable rental apartments in the project area.

"At this time, I do not know whether ESDC is simply trying to rip off displaced residential condemnees who are unaware of their statutory relocation rights, or whether ESDC is ignoring the UDC Act entirely," he asserted. "As matters stand, ESDC’s stated relocation program is unlawful on its face."

As noted by the bolded language, the UDC Act seems to offer wiggle room--though Locker contends that relocation into the project is feasible, given that it would include housing, not simply commercial space.

Locker previously filed suit challenging the relocation plan, charging that it was illusory, given that it would hardly guarantee similarly affordable housing to rent-stabilized tenants--paying rents well under $1000--in today's real estate market. An appellate court upheld the relocation plan, but Locker said this week he would challenge it.

He asserted that not only is the process unlawful under the UDC Act and contrary to the GPP, the eminent domain process is not final--given the pending appeal--and "relocation is premature as a matter of law."

As for whether it's premature, I asked the ESDC's Johnston if timing of the relocation effort would be delayed because of the appeal in the state eminent domain case newly pending before the state Court of Appeals. I didn't get an answer.

Comments

  1. The 2-page attached document is entitled "ESDC's Relocation Program" and the first heading is entitled "Residential Relocation Assistance". It fails to offer relocation benefits mandated by law. Period. Now ESDC calls it merely a letter of introduction? Sounds like they are taking lessons from that basketball coach. ESDC has shown itself to be incapable of following any aspect of the laws applicable to eminent domain. It seems intent on giving the courts new reasons to scrutinize this utterly corrupt process. We will oblige.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What? The ESDC is incompetent and/or deceitful and/or ignorant? Shocking, I say! Shocking!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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…