Skip to main content

The buildout sequence was graphically confirmed in 2009 and 2010, before economy turned; state offered fig leaf for Forest City's plan to delay expensive deck

Plan from 2006 Draft Design Guidelines
When Atlantic Yards developer Forest City Ratner last October changed the construction sequence for the residential towers--planning to build four towers on the southeast parking lot block after the arena block, rather than first building a deck over the railyard--I pointed out that that had not been the indicated sequence.

After all, the November 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement from the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) indicated that the three towers in the western section of Phase Two--along the railyard between Sixth Avenue and Carlton Avenue--would be built before the seven towers to the east, between Carlton and Vanderbilt Avenue.

And that continued after the project was re-approved in 2009; according to the ESDC's December 2010 Technical Analysis, "Development of each site is still generally expected to occur from west to east in a clockwise direction, starting with the arena block."

The buildout initially was to be clockwise, not the
leapfrog (now planned) indicated by the arrow
What I didn't include were the 2009 and 2010 graphics confirming that.

State fig leaf for Forest City plans

What does it all mean? Even in 2009-2010, when the economy was still emerging from deep trouble, the state government still signaled in at least some documents that the deck would be built promptly. That means the blight of the below-grade railyard would have been removed.

Now that the economy is better, and residential construction in Brooklyn is hot, Forest City has no plans to build the deck.

In fact, for Forest City's business purposes, as explained this past March, it has revised the notion of Atlantic Yards Phase 1. It includes the arena block and the southeast block--the parcels demarcated in red. That definition does not appear on any government documents.

Versus the Development Agreement

Of course, Forest City doesn't have to build the platform (or deck) over the railyard immediately. . The multiple environmental review documents regarding the buildout sequence were contradicted by the Development Agreement signed in late 2009.

The developer has 15 years to start construction of the platform. Neither the ESDC's June 2009 Technical Memorandum nor December 2010 Technical Analysis made mention of that fact.

And the Development Agreement requires construction of one residential building on the southeast block, Block 1129, within ten years of the Project Effective Date (which was May 2010). That hints that construction might come before the deck.

Now, assuming that Forest City Ratner's plans succeed in getting a modular construction factory up and running, it looks like three towers around the arena will be completed in the next four to six years, and  tower construction on the southeast block could easily begin--and perhaps be well in progress--before 2020.
From June 2009 Technical Memorandum

The indicated sequence: 2009

The environmental review documents, at least, suggested that the deck would be built to support towers over the railyard.

The June 2009 Technical Memorandum contained the table at right.

It showed showed that the expensive platforms for Block 1120 (the railyard between Sixth and Carlton) and Block 1121 (the railyard between Carlton and Vanderbilt) would be built well before Buildings 11-14 would go up on "terra firma," as Forest City puts it.

The Technical Memorandum was issued as part of the re-approval of the project.

The indicated sequence: 2010

After a lawsuit challenged the environmental review, the ESDC in December 2010 produced a Technical Analysis (Part 1, 2, 3) further confirming the anticipated sequence.

The graphics clearly illustrate, if not a clockwise movement, an eastward one. First there's work on the arena block, plus Site 5 across Flatbush Avenue, along with work on the railyard.

Then came a deck over the first railyard segment, along with Building 15, between Dean and Pacific streets east of Sixth Avenue. (That building likely will wait, because it requires another round of eminent domain.)

Then, when the development moves east of Vanderbilt Avenue, the construction continues steadily east, with one tower first built on the parking lot block, but then a section of the deck built to support a tower.

That process continues, according to the graphic.

While the graphical sequence suggested a steady march from west to east, the Development Agreement offered another option: wait to build that expensive deck. That proved more amenable to Forest City Ratner's business purposes.


  1. I have a question about Building Six, which i presume here is "B6."

    Has Building 6 been built? Is it unfinished? Is it going to get taller in the 2014-2016 Revised Construction Phasing?

    I ask because a local artist has made it his issue to put limits on the height of Building Six, and I am trying to figure out if his battle is already lost, or still waging. Richard F. Kessler's cause is to protect what he calls "the Brooklyn Mirador,' the view to the Empire State Building as seen through the arch at Grand Army. According to Kessler, Building Six will block this view. (Richard F. Kessler:

    Looking at the drawings you've provided in this blog post, B6 is teal, for "newly built," or white/gray, for "previously built."
    So, if B6 is already built, is the damage done? Does it block the view?
    Are there plans (in the "Revised Phase") to make it taller, and by 2016 will it block the view?

    Adding to my confusion, THIS report tells me the status of Building Six is "unbuilt [cancelled]."

    The view to the Empire State Building is visible seasonally. Right now, the trees at Bailey Fountain (just behind the arch) are too thick with foliage, but come November one will be able see it-- unless Building Six already stands in the way.

    ::Aside, Kessler's research is very, very unreliable. He might be off about the part that its Building Six threatening the view. Maybe it's another one of the buildings...::

    Thanks for helping me sort this out. Basically I am trying to find out, are Kessler's claims accurate? Is there a building underway that would be as tall as to block the view? Or is it already built? Or is there no such threat to the 'Brooklyn Mirador' ? Thanks.

    1. No towers have been built yet. B2, at the corner of Flatbush Avenue and Dean Street, is under construction.

      B6 has not been canceled. Nothing's been canceled, though B1, the office tower at Atlantic and Flatbush, is clearly on hold.

      I don't know whether B6 would block the view, but I would caution that any planned/proposed tower in the Atlantic Yards project is subject to change.


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…