Skip to main content

Business as usual: Times notes Ratner's seeking more housing subsidies, but ignores lack of a cost-benefit analysis (and omits disclosure)

There are a couple of notable things about the New York Times article today headlined Atlantic Yards’ Developer Races a Court Hearing, a Bond Deadline and Opponents.

First, it portrays the project through the perspective of the developer, while not acknowledging that Forest City Ratner never testified at the public hearing last month (which the Times didn't cover in print, only on The Local, the blog aimed at Fort Greene and Clinton Hill). Second, it states that new renderings of the arena will be released, likely before Labor Day, but--it goes unmentioned--that likely would be after the opportunity for public comment ends on August 31.

Third, it reveals that Forest City Ratner has sought additional housing subsidies from the city, despite the careful statement by FCR executive MaryAnne Gilmartin last month that “Forest City does not expect to ask for more subsidy.”

The reason that's news: while Forest City is now framing Atlantic Yards as an affordable housing project, the developer won't build the affordable housing without sufficient city subsidies. And we still don't know--though serious doubts have been raised by experts like Michelle de la Uz of the Fifth Avenue Committee--how the cost-per-unit compares to alternatives.

Business as usual

The article begins:
As the usual tumult greeted the final public hearings on the Atlantic Yards development last month, it was business as usual for the developer Bruce C. Ratner.

He visited three rating agencies in preparation for selling bonds this fall to finance the first project in the 22-acre development near Downtown Brooklyn: an $800 million, 18,000-seat arena for the New Jersey Nets.

He flew to Moscow to meet with the billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov about investing in the money-losing Nets.

He went to and from City Hall and the state’s economic development offices on Third Avenue to complete the paperwork for the Atlantic Yards development and to start work on the arena.

Unmentioned: FCR officials did not participate in the final public hearings, but they--at least Gilmartin--did appear on July 22, and offered several answers that strained credulity.

Project "more important"

The article continues:
“We are racing to the finish line,” Mr. Ratner said in an interview as the public hearing drew to a close. “Our sense is that while this project was important five years ago, it has become even more important given the economy and the job situation in the city.”

Aside from the rebuilding of the World Trade Center, Atlantic Yards is the largest project in the city moving forward. The redevelopment of the 26-acre Hudson Yards in Manhattan and dozens of other projects have been slowed or stopped by a flagging economy and a lack of real estate financing.

Even more important to whom? Certainly to the developer. But the importance to the city and state depend on the costs and benefits and--as it was noted on July 22, but unmentioned in this article--the state has not revealed a fiscal analysis it is "constantly" updating.

(That fiscal analysis is not even a full cost-benefit analysis. The closest thing we have is testimony by the Independent Budget Office that the arena would be a money-loser for the city, but that news has not appeared in the Times, only mentioned in a blog comment.)

This might have been the right time for the Times to insert the disclaimer that the newspaper's parent company partnered with FCR in building the new Times Tower. Such disclosure, typical for most AY-related stories for a while, is absent. (In June 2005, then Public Editor Byron Calame wrote, in regard to an interview with Ratner, "The New York Times, I believe, has an obligation to alert readers when they are reading substantive articles about a company or individual with whom the newspaper has some business or professional relationship.")

Hurdles facing FCR

The article notes challenges facing the developer:
But Mr. Ratner must clear a number of important hurdles before starting construction of the arena and the first four residential towers.

There is an Oct. 14 hearing before the state’s highest court, where opponents hope to scuttle Atlantic Yards by challenging the state’s use of eminent domain. Beyond that, there is a looming deadline: he must get the financing done and start work by Dec. 31 in order to qualify for a much needed tax-exempt bond status and hold on to a $400 million naming-rights deal with Barclays Bank for the arena.

Mr. Ratner acknowledged that he was also seeking additional investors for the Nets, but he said he and his company would retain a substantial stake in the team, which he hopes to move to Brooklyn during the 2011-12 season.

...Officials have given him more time to build eight acres of publicly accessible open space and as many as 16 buildings and 6,400 apartments, while allowing him to replace the railyard with a smaller, less expensive yard than originally planned. About 40 percent of the housing would be built for low-, moderate- and middle-income families.

(Emphasis added)

The article does not point out that even the Empire State Development Corporation acknowledges the potential for a delayed buildout, in which only an arena and one tower would be constructed.

So even if hurdles are cleared, there's a good chance that FCR wouldn't construct four residential towers soon. And that's important, because the developer and state still say the project would be done in a decade, even though that seems increasingly unlikely--after all, former ESDC CEO Marisa Lago acknowledged it would take "decades"--and such delay diminishes the expected public benefits.

As for moving the team during the 2011-12 season, does that mean that the arena would be open for the beginning of the season? If not, would the team move across state lines during the season?

Actually, the state has not officially given the developer more time--the state still claims that the buildout would take ten years, though it could take longer. Ratner gained more time in the September 2007 City and State Funding Agreements.

New challenges

The article notes October 14 hearing date in the state eminent domain appeal, which should be resolved in late November, and quotes Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn spokesman Daniel Goldstein:
“We plan on bringing at least two more significant lawsuits against the phantom project,” a reference to the developer’s failure to release new images of his buildings after scrapping the original designs.

Mr. Ratner said he expected to release new images of the arena before Labor Day. “I think the final architecture will be really beautiful,” he said.

Well, one of those DDDB-funded/organized lawsuits would be over the failure to issue a Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), while the other, I suspect, would be against the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Need for affordable housing

The article closes:
The developer disputed critics who claim that he may never build the parks and affordable housing that he once promised, now that the expected completion date has been pushed out to 2019, from 2016. Mr. Ratner said there was a continuing need for affordable housing for the city’s teachers, nurses, firefighters and hotel workers.

“There is a stable and steady group of takers for work-force housing in the city,” Mr. Ratner said. “The goal is not just to create the required amount but possibly more than that.”

In recent weeks, the developer has sought additional housing subsidies from city officials, who have so far declined to go beyond the standard incentives for developers.

Of course there's a need for "work-force housing," which is not the same thing as "low-income housing," which followers of ACORN, the housing advocacy group that signed the Atlantic Yards Housing Memorandum of Understanding, seek. 

Only 900 of the planned 2250 subsidized units (out of 4500 total rentals, plus 1930 condos) would go to low-income families, while numerous "affordable" units would be near or above current market rates.

Forest City Ratner needs to make its profit. The city and state want more affordable housing. But they can't prove that Atlantic Yards would deliver the latter until we see the numbers.

Getting the bonds

The article closes:
The project’s underwriters, led by Goldman Sachs, are also preparing to sell about $700 million in bonds for the arena in October.

Some real estate executives and critics said it would be hard to sell the bonds for such an uncertain project. But Jay Abrams, a bond analyst at FMS Bonds, said there “is definitely an appetite for tax-exempt bonds in New York, and elsewhere.” The lawsuit, he added, “is not necessarily a game-killer. At the right price, there’s always a buyer for bonds.”

So how do you sell bonds for a project that's still under litigation? Apparently by offering some kind of guarantee, or premium. It makes it a bit more costly for the sellers, since the buyer must insure against the risk of the deal going south.

The question is whether the bond sale would begin before the October 14 hearing date, or whether the sellers would wait--just to be careful--to see how that court argument goes. My prediction is the latter.

(Update: See Gari N. Corp for some skepticism about the bond sales.)


  1. Once again, the New York Times comes up far short of where "the paper of record" should be on what it acknowledges is one of the largest and most important development projects in New York City.

    Why do they even bother "reporting" on Atlantic Yards? Maybe they like to keep you busy dissecting their schlock?

    Too bad I could only cancel my subscription once.

  2. Bagli also neglects to mention that The MTA gave Ratner a huge break by allowing him to substantially reduce his previous commitment to pay $100 million for the air rights over the Vanderbilt Yards.


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…