Skip to main content

Despite request for retroactive community preference, NYC did not change policy for Atlantic Yards affordable housing

When a new, faster (after delays) 2025 timetable was announced in June 2014 for the Atlantic Yards affordable housing as part of a settlement, one apparent sign of progress was a potential tweak to the city's policy regarding local preference in the affordable housing lottery, in which 50% of the places are reserved for those nearby.

That tweak would've helped those recently displaced from the Community Districts nearest the project. As of now, that hasn't happened, and there's no reason to think it will.

The typical preference and the hoped-for tweak

For affordable housing in New York City, typically half the lottery slots are reserved for residents of the single Community District in which the project is built--a not uncontroversial policy, as I'll describe below.

In this case, because the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park site itself spans three Community Districts, the community preference for initially encompassed residents of Community Districts 2, 6, and 8. Later, then Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries got Community District 3 added, including Bedford-Stuyvesant.

But if affordable housing should help people facing gentrification pressures to stay in their neighborhood, there's an argument for extending that preference to those displaced recently--after a project has been approved but before the lottery opens.

That's the case negotiators for BrooklynSpeaks made, and a June 2014 letter (bottom) from Deputy Mayor Alicia Glen to Michelle de la Uz of the Fifth Avenue Committee, an affordable housing advocate in Brooklyn and a lead negotiator for BrooklynSpeaks, stated:
With regards to the Atlantic Yards project, the City, consistent with Fair Housing Law, will review the affordable housing lottery preferences and will take into account the surrounding community residents' ties to the neighborhood, including ties of those that were displaced since 2006 when the General Project Plan was first approved.
That seemed like good news for expanding the community preference. As BrooklynSpeaks wrote in a summary of the 2014 settlement terms:
Affordable housing at Atlantic Yards is expected to be awarded by lottery; residents of Brooklyn community districts 2, 3, 6 and 8 are expected to receive preference for 50% of such housing, consistent with federal fair housing law. The NYC Letter expresses the intention of the City of New York to consider former residents of districts 2, 3, 6 and 8 who have been displaced since the time of Atlantic Yards’ 2006 approval as eligible to participate with preference in lotteries for its affordable housing.
(Emphases added)

What happened

But the "intention to consider" did not mean any policy change.

When the lottery was announced for the first Pacific Park affordable building, 461 Dean, there was no reference to any retroactive community preference. Ditto for the lottery for the second building, the "100% affordable" 535 Carlton.

I inquired to the city Department of Housing Preservation and Development and got a statement that didn't quite answer the question:
HDC [NYC Housing Development Corporation] carefully considered the City’s marketing practices, community preference, Fair Housing policies, and commitments made by the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park elected officials when establishing the marketing parameters for Pacific Park. HDC determined that including Community Board 3 as well as Community Boards 2, 6, and 8 in the community preference is the most effective way to recognize displaced residents with ties to the community, as was suggested by the local elected officials and community advocates in recent years.
This administration is deeply concerned about displacement, and has introduced numerous measures to protect low- and moderate-income families who are being priced out of the neighborhoods that they helped to build.
(Emphasis added)

That's perplexing. The ongoing community preference policy might help residents facing the threat of displacement but not ones who have already been displaced. I asked for further clarification, but didn't get it.

I asked de la Uz about the potential retroactive policy; she passed on my query to the Mutual Housing Association of New York (MHANY), the ACORN successor that is marketing and managing the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park affordable housing. I didn't hear back from them.

Maintaining the current policy

Perhaps the requested policy was a stretch, given that the current community preference is already under enough question, so expanding that preference would be precarious. As the Times reported in an April article headlined Segregation Issue Complicates de Blasio’s Housing Push:
One way the city already tries to ensure that existing residents remain in areas being rezoned is through a “community preferences” policy, which allots as many as half of new lower-cost units to applicants already living in the area where such units are being built.
But a fair-housing group, the Anti-Discrimination Center, challenged that policy in a federal lawsuit last year, contending that it perpetuates segregation. In the case of mostly white districts, the center contended, the preferences deny black and Latino New Yorkers an equal chance for a home in better neighborhoods.
The article quoted de la Uz:
“The issue of community preference cuts both ways and an argument can clearly be made in certain neighborhoods, at varying stages of neighborhood change, that a community preference does in fact promote fair housing,” said Michelle de la Uz, a member of the city’s Planning Commission and executive director of Fifth Avenue Committee, a nonprofit developer in Brooklyn.
The argument against local preference

But not all agree. In an essay in City Limits yesterday,  Building Justice: How Community Preferences Enforce Racial Segregation in NYC, the Anti-Discrimination Center's Craig Gurian made a reasonable case for the challenge:
Each lottery gives preference for 50 percent of the units to people who already live in the community district where the particular housing development is being built. That preference exists even if the applicant has only lived in the community district for 10 minutes and even if the applicant has been living in comfortable circumstances. By contrast, the New Yorker who has been living outside of the community district doubled-up with relatives in a deeply impoverished neighborhood for decades is not permitted to compete for any preference units that a community district resident has applied for.
In other words, there are strong arguments on both sides, with the longstanding local reference seemingly more deserving of preference than the more recent arrival.

Gurian also writes compellingly about the larger issue: "opening all neighborhoods more equally to affordable housing opportunity," including those in the suburbs.

One irony, from an Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park perspective, is that Gurian focuses on households earning from 40% to 60% of area median income (AMI), those categorized as low-income. 

Much affordable housing--70% of the next two all-affordable Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park towers--is not low-income. That won't come close to helping those "doubled-up with relatives."

The bottom line

The rising cost of housing, and the very broad range of "affordable" (which simply means households pay 30% of their income in rent), mean that subsidized housing goes to many far from "deeply impoverished" people.

As Prospect Heights activist Gib Veconi, who also negotiated that BrooklynSpeaks agreement, commented in April on that Times article:
The Atlantic Yards project taught an important lesson about delivering affordable housing through large-scale land use actions (like rezoning). Atlantic Yards was announced more than twelve years ago, but the first affordable apartment has yet to be completed. Meanwhile, escalation of residential and commercial rents began literally the day after the press conference. Since then, Prospect Heights has changed from a majority African American community to a one with a majority of white residents. When the first affordable apartments at Atlantic Yards enter the lottery this spring, their relatively high income targets will make units set aside for community preference most appropriate for tenants who have moved to the neighborhood since the project's announcement, and who themselves are now facing displacement pressure from rising rents.
(Emphasis added)

In response to my query, Veconi confirmed he meant "most appropriate" as "most likely to be occupied, given current demographic statistics" (not the "most deserving").

He added, "I consider the use of affordable housing subsidies to finance apartments intended for people earning multiples of the median income in the district where they are built to be poor public policy."

I agree. That, however, is what the de Blasio administration is happy to produce--and a wide range of advocates have generally accepted, and even applauded.

461 Dean Affordable Lottery, Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park by AYReport on Scribd



Comments

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…