Skip to main content

Chris Owens in 2003 warned about Atlantic Yards issues that linger: accountability, community usage, affordable tickets

Prospect Heights political activist Chris Owens wrote a letter about Atlantic Yards to the 12/22/03 Brooklyn Paper that has surprising resonance, even though many dismissed it for some seemingly unrealistic demands. I've interpolated some comments in [italics in brackets]:
Prove arena will work
To the editor:
The fact that this grand plan has now been presented to the world without any community discussion or input is an outrage and, furthermore, does nothing to convince the arena’s opponents that there is good faith at work here. It would, however, be even worse to find out that some people actually WERE “in the room” regarding this proposal and behaved as surrogates for grassroots input.
...So with all of these concerns, how can Borough President Markowitz “buy me off”? (After all, that is the name of the game here and will be for many of the players.)
[He was quite right that some were bought off with promises.]
•Prove with numbers that this project is different from the economic and cultural disasters that have taken place in other cities ... and there HAVE been disasters.
[The arena hasn't been an economic and cultural disaster, but consider how the hundreds of millions in subsidies and tax breaks might have gone, say, to keep libraries open and serve a broad cross-section of Brooklynites.]
•Create a Community Development Corporation with a representative, volunteer Board of Directors responsible for the operations of the project and the fulfillment of all obligations — including community input and involvement with meaningful planning and project performance evaluation.
[This goes to the general issue of accountability. Advocates like BrooklynSpeaks have called for a new governance entity... and are still waiting.]
•Make all of this happen with NO public money AND with New York State getting the full value for the land it surrenders.
Put those land transfer proceeds in a trust governed by the CDC and the communities impacted by this project.
[No public money might have been a stretch, since they always say it's needed for infrastructure. But why didn't the state and the city get fair market value for land they gave up? Why wasn't the value of naming rights calculated in a cost-benefit analysis?]
•Provide a community usage plan for the arena. In fact, this proposal should be considered only in the context of a greater articulated vision for all of Brooklyn. Even with all of the rhetoric, a more specific vision for the borough and this city has yet to emerge.
[This was promised as part of the Community Benefits Agreement (CBA): ten events a year, managed by CBA partner Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance. It didn't happen in the first year of operations but is supposed to happen next year.]
•Present a ticket-pricing plan for Nets games that is affordable and sustainable for all residents of Brooklyn — including for the playoffs and championship series.
[Arena boosters made a big deal out of the promised 2000 $15 Nets tickets, which were barely available. Next season the price goes up to $25.]
•Present a plan for ensuring that at least 80 percent of all employees (principals, contractor and subcontractor for construction and for operations) related to this project will be residents of Brooklyn, no less than 80 percent of the employed Brooklyn residents are people of color and that no less than 60 percent of those people of color are of African descent. No excuses.
[Such percentages likely were unrealistic to many, but consider them a starting point for bargaining. Fact is, we still don't have reliable figures on employment and contracting, because the developer never hired an Independent Compliance Monitor required by the CBA.]
•Mr. Ratner and his firm receive no compensation for their involvement with this project.
(After all, this is about Brooklyn, right?)
[This was seemingly tongue-in-cheek, but remember how sports columnist Ian O'Connor suggested that, if the arena was really about Brooklyn, they should've named it for Jackie Robinson.]
If Borough President Markowitz, Mayor Bloomberg and Bruce Ratner can create this covenant with us, then I’m willing to talk about an arena.
— Chris Owens, Prospect Heights

Comments

  1. "No public money might have been a stretch, since they always say it's needed for infrastructure."

    The expensive infrastructure at Atlantic Yards is the deck over the rail yards, but the project could have been done in ways that would have brought the city money. Battery Park City, where Amanda Burden first worked in this field, is one model, but it is very different than the model used by the Bloomberg administration.

    Mayor Bloomberg believes in public-private development partnerships. Bloomberg administration practice is to give public funds and subsidies such as greater density or low-cost land to developers, who are always from what we now call the 1%. These partnerships are done through public agencies used to avoid public input and oversight. Normal public process required by law is sidestepped, and the developer gets to avoid a lot of public scrutiny. The theory is that he is doing work that benefits the city.

    Manhattan's Battery Park City was developed by the Battery Park City Authority, which since the 1980s has paid the city $1.4 billion and continues to pay $200 million a year. BPC too had expensive infrastructure: 3 billion cubic feet of fill from the World Trade Center were used to build a 92 acre extension of the island into the Hudson River. This was all paid for with bonds.

    Norman would know better than me, but I would imagine that New York City and New York State have paid out far more than they and the MTA have taken in, or will take in. This is all justified by the argument of increased tax revenue, new housing, new affordable housing, etc.

    Atlantic Yards could have had a governmental entity or authority float bonds to build the deck, and then the authority could have lots to a variety of developers, who would build according to a plan made by the authority. From the developer's point of view, the process is quite normal: typically a New York developer buys a building lot and erects a building according to planning and zoning requirements. The process is much more cut and dry than the process at Atlantic Yards, where the Planning Commissioner's desire to have a complex designed by Frank Gehry resulted in increased density. In the end, of course, we will not have the Gehry designs, but we will still have the increased density.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John, you're right that there could have been a different model... though I should point out that public money is not going to build the deck (though who knows, they may try to offload that). It was originally supposed to be just for infrastructure--streets, sewers, utilities, but of course was expanded to repay developer Forest City Ratner for land purchases.

    I'd attribute the increased density not to the role of Gehry but to Ratner's desire to make the numbers work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Norman, Look at the "iconic towers" in the East Midtown plan. The plan clearly says, If you hire a Starchitect we like will give you a LOT of extra FAR. That is how the administration works: do what the Mayor wants and the rich get richer. His advisers Amanda Burden and Vishaan Chakrabarti advise him that he wants shiny new Starchitecture. There's nothing controversial or snarky about saying that. It's simply a fact.

    Our Planning Commissioner is a big fan of Starchitecture. Her best friend and architectural adviser was Herbert Muschamps, who was the biggest New York cheerleader for Starchitecture.

    A model for this is London, where the city gives extra height to developers who hire Starchitects like Norman Foster or Renzo Piano (see The Shard, in a city which 20 years ago had short towers, only). It's an alliance between Big Finance, Big Development and Big Architecture (as opposed to urban design). Bankers, developers and architects in Shanghai, Dubai, Hong Kong, London and New York will tell you that it is what cities need to compete in the 21st century. Or in the words of Commissioner Burden, ""Design is, frankly, part of a long term strategy for New York City to compete on the global stage. Great design, innovative, challenging design, keeps a city young, and vibrant and compelling, It shows that a city importantly is open to change, entrepreneurial thinking and creative engagement. Density, diversity, tolerance and aspiration are all quintessential New York City qualities, that are translated through the language of city design, and are key to attracting city investment."

    In Bloomberg circles, London and Shanghai are the models.

    John

    PS: If you have $2 billion in subsidies and you pay a below-market price for the land it should be pretty easy to make the numbers work, even when you have to build the deck. Steve Ross has no problem building the deck at his Hudson Yards sight. One reason for this is that he locked in a low price with the city.

    ReplyDelete
  4. PS: I wasn't implying that the city or the state would pay in this case. I was saying that when the Battery Park City Authority paid for the infrastructure, it also took much of the profit, with $1.4 billion and counting going to the city.

    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…

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.