Skip to main content

ESD non sequitur: short time for SEIS review justified by "delay in Phase II construction and limited Project changes" (but what about lengthy document?)

So why exactly did Empire State Development, the state authority overseeing/shepherding Atlantic Yards, give so little time to respond to the court-ordered Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, which was released 3/28/14, and with a comment period ending 5/12/14?

Project critics and opponents thought the process was set up to meet Forest City Ratner's plans for its pending joint venture with the Chinese government-owned Greenland Group.

After hearing complaints about the time, the state authority gave an obfuscatory answer in the Response to Comments chapter of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement issued and approved last week.


Comments on the issue came from Assemblymembers Jim Brennan and Walter Mosley, Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, and even a project supporter, Meredith Staton:
I request that ESD extend the public review period for the DSEIS by an additional 60 days, thereby providing the public with more time to review the extensive materials released for comment. (Brennan)

I don't know how anybody could read all of [the DSEIS] in a short time. So I'm hoping they would extend the time for us to review it. (Staten) [sic]

I want to put into the record my request that the public review period for the DSEIS (released on March 28th — 34 days ago) be extended for an additional 60 days. As announced by ESD, you will close the period for written public comments on May 12th, 45 days from the release of the DSEIS. I, along with many others, believe that is an insufficient amount of time for my constituents and neighbors to properly analyze and respond to a document of more than 1,200 pages, and compares unfavorably to an 85-day public comment period allowed for the draft scope of work issued on December 19th, 2012, and a 67-day comment period for the DEIS issued on July 18th, 2006. To this end, I would urge ESD to re-evaluate and re-issue a new deadline in response to this most recent impact study. (Mosley)

DDDB strongly objects to the grossly insufficient time given to comment on a document of this size and complexity. ESD must admit that it has had over two years to work on this document and is providing only the bare minimum of legally required time to comment. This is further evidenced by the fact that the comment period on the MGPP lasts until May 30th. As ESD is well aware, that slightly longer comment period is required pursuant to Section 16 of the UDC Act which requires a minimum of a 30 day comment period following the public hearing on the MGPP. It is quite obvious that if ESD actually cared about public comment, it would, at a minimum have had the comment period for the DSEIS match the comment period on the MGPP. (DDDB)

The response was brief:
The comment period complies with applicable SEQRA regulations. Because the DSEIS was a draft supplemental EIS focused on a delay in Phase II construction and limited Project changes, ESD determined that a longer time period was not required for adequate public review.
Let's take a look at that.

The comment period complies with applicable SEQRA regulations. 


Because the DSEIS was a draft supplemental EIS focused on a delay in Phase II construction...

It doesn't necessarily follow that a delay means a simple set of circumstances. As stated by Mosley, the document was more than 1200 pages. Consider this rather detailed memo on transportation issues.

and limited Project changes, ESD determined that a longer time period was not required...

Though the formal changes are limited, the potential impacts of delay--and the interplay with delayed aspects of Phase 1--may be significant.

 for adequate public review. 

The notion of adequacy is dubious, because there's no sign there's adequate review by the ESD board, either: they rubber-stamp documents without question, even when there's good reason to think the Final SEIS is not complete.


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…