Barclays Center backers are fortunate they have an accessible plaza open to arenagoers, rather than an office tower looming at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues, offering an atrium, aka Urban Room, that would serve as more cramped entry for the arena.
That plaza that was never supposed to exist, and would not have been approved as a permanent feature, given that the office tower, and jobs within, was crucial to the cost-benefit analyses for the overall Atlantic Yards project.
There's another reason, too: that tower would likely have been a site for significant wind, and attendant cold. Last week, waiting outside the tallest nearby building, the Williamsburgh Savings Bank a block away, I was reminded how the bank tower is both one of the windiest and coldest spots in the borough.
The wind study
Interestingly enough, the Atlantic Yards wind study (embedded below) I wrote about on 12/5/06 was thorough about estimating the velocity of wind, but could have gone a lot farther to warn Brooklynites of the potential impact of wind plus high-rise construction on temperature.
The study pointed out that the Urban Room proposed for the corner of Flatbush and Atlantic avenues--the entrance to the arena and flagship tower--would quite serve as the project's promised promised “front stoop,” given that it would be too windy for the category of "leisure sitting."
But the 22-page report, conducted by Minneapolis-based Newmerical Technologies International for AKRF, the consultancy that conducted most of the environmental impact analysis, focused on the impact of wind on sitting, walking, and standing, but not on temperature. (The study was not formally included in the environmental review but later released.)
In other words, wind increases cold, especially near that particular crossroads, already noted for cold.
Until a hand-held anemometer -- a wind gauge -- becomes widely available to New Yorkers, pinpointing the coldest and windiest point in the city will be impossible. But there is a contender in Brooklyn: when pedestrians approach 1 Hanson Place, home to the Williamsburgh Savings Bank, they wrap their coats more tightly, secure their hats, and hunch their bodies against the sudden blast of frigid air.
''I've seen thousands and thousands of people come through the doors of BAM,'' said John Jones, who has worked for 10 years as an usher at the theater, around the corner from 1 Hanson Place. ''If I had a dollar for every time someone comes in and tells me how cold it is on that corner, I'd be a wealthy man.''
The article quoted a National Weather Service meteorologist as suggesting this microclimate, caused by a solitary skyscraper, could cut the temperature 5 to 8 degrees. Bill Harris, the building's chief engineer, told the Times he estimated 10 degrees. What about wind?
Harris also reported that "the wind sometimes blows the clock's 300-pound hands out of sync" and people need help walking across the street.
That suggests a more dramatic impact than that in the Newmerical report, which concluded:
In general, while ground-level wind speeds in the area are projected to increase with the addition of the proposed Atlantic Yards Arena project for all locations identified, these increases would not cause significant hardship to pedestrians.
And while "[a]ll receptor locations indicate wind speeds less than 16 MPH for an 80% recurrence level," suitable for walking and general activities--if not sitting--Harris's observation suggests something worse.
Further questions
That said, the Williamsburgh Savings Bank is around the corner, not at the Atlantic Yards site.
Could it be that the microclimate a block away would be more different, and influenced by the presence of the arena and (in time, presumably) other nearby towers.
Still, before they build that new tower--crucial to the cost-benefit analysis--it's worth evaluating it would affect both wind and temperature.
As candidates for mayor, City Council, and other offices face voters on the campaign trail, what to ask them about Atlantic Yards? It's tough to frame the right question, as I've contended.
The most critical candidate so far is Comptroller John Liu, who last week suffered a significant blow to his campaign, as two associates were convicted for attempting to defraud the campaign finance system using straw donors.
I think the Atlantic Yards issue can be reduced to a few issues of accountability, which indicate whether the candidate trusts developer Forest City Ratner, or not.
(There's a mayoral forum tonight at 7 pm at Congregation Beth Elohim in Park Slope, sponsored by seven civic groups.)
FCR in the driver's seat?
A simple, overall formulation: Do you support the status quo, with Forest City allowed to build the project at its own pace, over 25 years? If not, do you support the option of dividing Phase 2 of the development site for other developers to bid on?
After all, that was the essential divide during the 2/27/13 public hearing on the scope for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS).
Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz congratulated Forest City and its governmental partner/overseer, Empire State Development. Other project supporters urged that any roadblock posed by the SEIS be removed. Project critics and opponents argued for the option to bring in other developers to achieve the promised public benefits on a faster timetable.
What about the CBA?
Various elected officials have claimed they believed in--or still believe in--the much-hyped Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) Forest City signed with select groups, most of which didn't exist until Atlantic Yards was announced.
Their posture toward the CBA deserves greater clarity. A simple litmus test regards accountability. After all, the contract requires an Independent Compliance Monitor, but Forest City has steadily shirked that responsibility.
So, why not ask: Will you criticize the developer for failing to hire the Independent Compliance Monitor required by the CBA? Why not? Why haven't you done so?
Analyzing AY economics
Though there have been many promotional statements about the Barclays Center as an "economic engine" and providing "2000 jobs"--1900 or so of them part-time, without benefits--we don't have much clarity on the actual costs and benefits of the project.
Here's another question, which drills down to what I believe to be a significant, uncounted benefit to Forest City Ratner, worth tens of millions of dollars: Will you push to reveal whether and how much Forest City paid for city's property in the Atlantic Yards footprint, and how much it's really worth?
Accountability
A reader reminds me of another question: Do you support a new governance structure, outside the Empire State Development Corporation and incorporating local input, to oversee Atlantic Yards?
This goes to the overall issue of accountability.
The posture so far
When Bloomberg gave his State of the City address in February, as John Petro wrote in Next City,
To critics of Bloomberg’s pro-development agenda, the mayor’s choice of the Barclays Center for his final State of the City was bitterly appropriate — it represented an administration that gave deals to a select group of developers on projects that brought few public benefits. Among the mayor’s likely critics, however, some have chosen to remain quiet. Several Democratic mayoral candidates, otherwise seeking any way to differentiate themselves from Bloomberg, gave the mayor a pass on Atlantic Yards.
Why is that? Petro didn't get too far into it, but candidates like Public Advocate Bill de Blasio and former Comptroller Bill Thompson have ties to the union and community supporters of the project and, like City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, surely don't want to alienate the real estate community.
The answers of all of the candidates acknowledge that there is a serious problem with Forest City Ratner not fulfilling its obligations and promises to the public. I think the combined answers of all of the candidates indicate that if the elected officials and politicians in this city were less financially beholden to real estate developers in general, and to Forest City Ratner in particular, the question of what to do about the giant problem of Atlantic Yards would be relatively easy to solve.
The solution?: Elected officials, not taking money from Forest City Ratner and not beholden to Ratner, should get tough with Ratner, cut off subsidy to Ratner and take the mega-monopoly away from Ratner to divide it up amongst multiple developers.
An impact on the library system?
Warning of Forest City Ratner's potential role in buying the site of the Brooklyn Heights Library and developing a tower with a smaller library inside, White wrote:
Here are three prime reasons it is so difficult to get Forest City Ratner to honor its obligations to deliver public benefit: • Private/public partnerships are very difficult to manage effectively to produce maximum benefit for the public, especially if public officials are not adequately motivated to do so, which is where Mr. Albanese’s point about not taking contributions form developers has particular pertinence. Those partnerships tend to tilt irresistibly toward private benefit. • You can’t negotiate effectively with a monopoly • Forest City Ratner does not seem to be especially inclined to deliver public benefit, which may account for why it seeks to put itself in the two situations of the two bullet points above.
The always insightful and skeptical (not) Betty Liu of Bloomberg TV yesterday had an exclusive interview with Bruce Ratner and MaryAnne Gilmartin of Forest City Ratner, as the former--as had been in the works--stepped down as CEO but will remain as chairman.
Also note the over-the-top praise issued by Borough President Marty Markowitz:
Throughout his career, Bruce has dedicated himself to improving the lives of Brooklynites and New Yorkers—his vision and commitment to investing in our borough not only provided the lifeblood for Barclays Center, but was a driving force behind Brooklyn’s continued renaissance. I have every confidence that under the capable leadership of MaryAnne Gilmartin, the love affair between Brooklyn and Forest City Ratner will continue to grow and flourish.
From the TV interview
BL: "Bruce, you're a friend of this program... tell me the thinking behind you stepping aside as CEO for day-to-day operations?"
BR: "MaryAnne and I worked together for 18 years. we've done so much together. MaryAnne likes to say, and she 's right, we've finished each others sentences.... part of good leadership is establishing succession...."
BL: "You've worked almost two decades at Forest City Ratner... how are you going to take this company from here on out?"
MAG: "It's a pleasure to be here, a pleasure to be partner with Bruce. This is an exhilarating moment for me. What it really tells the world that women can do bricks and mortar... Women make good developers because it's problem solving, it's the great Rubik's cube of real estate. I'm proud to be part of a company that is known for doing great, creative work."
"You're 'leaning in,'" quipped the host, prompting satisfied laughs all around.
MAG: "We also have a portfolio, it shows that not only can women do real estate, they can drive operational excellence...I would not have taken the job had Bruce not agreed to be actively involved in day to day operations."
What's next: Atlantic Yards
BL: "What is next then for Forest City?"
MAG: "First of all, we are all about Atlantic Yards. 6400 units of housing... Over a million and a half people have passed through Barclays since it's opened. It's been an extraordinary success, and we're thrilled."
Gilmartin then noted that "there are 15" buildings, "predominantly housing, a large number of affordable units. So a priority of the company is to execute on the entitlements that we worked so hard to bring to bear at Atlantic Yards."
Actually, there are supposed to be 16 buildings, so it sounds like Gilmartin was either being careless or eliminating either the B1 office tower at the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues or, possibly, another tower.
What about modular?
Liu asked about the company's modular construction plans.
BR: "We think it has tremendous applications for a city like New York City.. holds costs down, fast, efficient, environmentally wonderful. MaryAnne has executed beautifully... You know exactly what your costs are... efficient, also very environmentally friendly. Most importantly is the cost element. Work in a factory, union wages are very, very appropriate both for the worker and for our company."
MAG: "Brooklyn is booming. I believe that, if we build it, they will come, so speed to market is a huge benefit of modular. The culture of the company... is really one that rewards creativity, it drives innovations.. we have the talent in house to do something in an industry that really doesn't innovate much... What makes modular so extraordinary is that it's such a grand departure from the way things have typically been done."
If Brooklyn is booming, then why won't Forest City build a deck over the Vanderbilt Yard before building on the Atlantic Yards parking lot?
Liu asked why others haven't done similarly?
BR: "It's not an innovative industry. Second thing, you need to have a pipeline of product... We've spent probably $10 million in the development of modular. a lot of research has gone into it. most companies don't have the time, interest, nor the pipeline... If you build one building and wait a couple of years, it doesn't make sense to put the time investment and the money investment. Because of Atlantic Yards, we can do that."
MAG: "We want to feed that factory... if you don't have the pipeline that Bruce mentioned, you can't feed that factory."
BR: "Now that the Islanders are leaving, and I think it's' good for everybody, but that's a very old coliseum, an old arena, the idea, how do you make something... it's a great place, a really live place... we think Nassau Coliseum should be fixed up, made into a music venue, a sports venue."
Barclays Center
BL: "What's next for Barclays Center?"
MAG: "We've had a lot of volume and variety, i think it's really sustaining the excellence, in terms of programming...best food of any arena.. We need to keep up the very high bar. The employees, we have high employee satisfaction, they love working there... the great track record we started. And finally, to be a very good neighbor to the community in Brooklyn. There were lots of concerns about that. We worked very hard to make sure this was of the community and in the community, and we need to keep doing a very fine job in that area."
Note that there's also been significant turnover at the arena, and no health insurance for the approximately 1900 part-time workers. As for being a good neighbor, note regular complaints and incident reports on Atlantic Yards Watch, including several examples of bass leaking into the community.
And, of course, there's an ongoing process for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement regarding the state's failure to study the impact of a potential 25-year buildout, as opposed to the long-promised decade, or the 15 years the state finally studied.
In addition, [Gilmartin] said she will also work to build up a new pipeline of development sites, particularly in Queens, and will work to make the Metrotech Center, a complex of office buildings Forest City Ratner began building along Flatbush Avenue in downtown Brooklyn in the late 1980s, appealing to technology and creative companies. Originally, it was pitched as ideal back office space for major Wall Street firms. While many developers have focused on areas like Manhattan's far West Side, Ms. Gilmartin said she is looking to create new projects in Queens, though she declined to specify what neighborhoods she would focus on. "The West Side is crowded," Ms. Gilmartin said. "I like the East Side and Queens." On Manhattan's Lower East Side, Forest City is expected to be among the companies submitting a bid to develop the big, long vacant Seward Park residential project.
On the same morning that Bruce Ratner announced that he was stepping down as President and Chief Executive Officer of Forest City Ratner, he also sat down for the “Featured Interview” at the Street and Smith’s Sports Business Journal’s “Sports Facilities and Franchises ’13″ event at the Brooklyn Bridge Marriott.
(Note that they also went to the Nets' final game last night.)
Ratner, asked about whether the Islanders would move to the Barclays Center a year before the announced 2015-16 season, was evasive: “At this point, no” discussion.
Regarding hockey:
Ratner acknowledged that the arena can’t hold more than 14,500 – that will make it the smallest capacity in the NHL. “There will be some adjustment, in terms of premium seating, but generally it will be like it is now,” Ratner said. “A positive is that the sight lines are extraordinary for hockey.”
The sight lines are not extraordinary everywhere, I'd bet.
Regarding community concerns:
Ratner has tended in the past to downplay the resistance level the team faced in the neighborhoods, but not as much on Wednesday. “We had a lot of opposition for a long time,” Ratner said, adding that “a lot of people didn’t want it.” But he said that now, “Almost all people who live within a few blocks of the arena use it and love it.”
That should be taken with the same grain of salt required when Ratner said he "anticipated" completing Atlantic Yards in a decade.
Regarding the design:
As for the departure of renowned architect Frank Gehry, Ratner said that while that scrapped arena design was more expensive, “it wasn’t so much the cost, it was the complexity and size of it.” “The most important thing was that the [Gehry] arena design required us to build four buildings around the arena, attached,” Ratner said. “But that was not financially or economically doable. When that happened, because of deadline problems we had with our bonds,” a new design was needed. Ratner added that a redesign of a Frank Gehry arena in a short time was “just not possible.” Ratner says that the scaled-down version doesn’t leave him missing any element of the original, except maybe less storage space within the arena.
Yes, the four towers were tethered to the arena, but also the Gehry arena was 850,000 square feet, as opposed to 675,000 square feet. That's a big difference.
FCE announcement Forest City Announces Leadership Transition at New York Subsidiary MaryAnne Gilmartin Succeeds Bruce Ratner as President & CEO of Forest City Ratner Companies; Ratner to Serve as Executive Chairman CLEVELAND, April 17, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Forest City Enterprises, Inc. (NYSE: FCEA and FCEB) today announced that MaryAnne Gilmartin, executive vice president of commercial and residential development, will succeed Bruce Ratner as president and chief executive officer of the company's Brooklyn-based subsidiary, Forest City Ratner Companies (FCRC). Ratner will serve as executive chairman of FCRC. The transition is part of the company's ongoing succession planning and is effective immediately. "Under the leadership of Bruce Ratner, the New York metropolitan area has become our largest core market and a key component of our overall value-creation model," said David J. LaRue, Forest City Enterprises president and chief executive officer. "He has also built a great team of real estate professionals with expertise in development, operations and management. We are thrilled that MaryAnne Gilmartin will continue this legacy and assume day-to-day leadership of FCRC as president and CEO, and that Bruce will continue to play a key role as executive chairman. I look forward to working with both of them along with the rest of the New York team." Gilmartin joined FCRC in 1994. During her 18-year tenure, she has played a pivotal role in a number of the company's most highly visible projects in the region, including Barclays Center arena, New York by Gehry at 8 Spruce Street and the New York Times Building. She began her career in real estate in 1986 as a New York City Urban Fellow at the Public Development Corporation. Ratner founded FCRC in 1985 in partnership with Cleveland-based Forest City Enterprises. Under his leadership, FCRC became one of the most active real estate businesses in the New York metropolitan area, developing, owning and operating more than 40 office, retail, hotel, and residential projects, totaling approximately 15 million square feet. In 2006, FCRC became a wholly owned subsidiary of Forest City Enterprises.
Following up on comments delivered orally at the 2/27/13 public meeting on the contents of the Draft Scope for an Atlantic Yards Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS), BrooklynSpeaks has issued a lengthy set of comments advocating, among other things, that the Phase 2 properties be divided and bid out to multiple developers in order to achieve the project goals--especially the removal of blight--closer to ten rather than 25 years.
BrooklynSpeaks, which was formed to modify rather than stop the project, has remained far more active than Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, which aimed to block the project.
The two organizations filed separate lawsuits that were combined and resulted in the court order for the SEIS, as a judge ruled--despite a legal playing field tilted toward government agencies--that the state had not studied the impact of a potential 25 year buildout, which was allowed by contract documents signed after the project was reapproved in 2009.
DDDB did not testify formally at the meeting (though some people active in DDDB testified), issued a shorter statement with some similar requests, though with a more pointed critique of the Draft Scope.
Unlike the BrooklynSpeaks statement and most of the testimony at the public meeting, DDDB also suggested that "alternate densities"--i.e., a smaller project be considered.
Both comments called for an updated and more comprehensive assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the project, given delays in construction and use of lower-cost modular construction techniques. I too filed comments requesting a cost-benefit analysis that incorporated different scenarios, including a partial/delayed buildout of housing, as well as a delay in the construction of the promised office tower.
One key issue is the 15-year deadline to start the platform over the Vanderbilt Yard, which is the below-grade piece of the project site that the city long considered blighted. Meanwhile, as BrooklynSpeaks states, residential construction in nearby Downtown Brooklyn is going gangbusters, as noted in coverage yesterday in Crain's NY Business.
Construction impacts
Also, Wayne Bailey of the neighboring Newswalk condominums filed a lengthy comment regarding the impacts of construction, pointing to numerous violations--trucks not using truck routes; idling limo; bright lights; noise; vibrations; garbage; tree removal--documented on the Atlantic Yards Watch website.
Another neighbor's comments
Also, Steve Ettlinger of Park Slope posted comments (embedded below) that requested analysis of the impacts on pedestrian safety and local drivers from illegal idling and parking, and the impacts of delays on local retail and public health.
What next
The comments will be considered in the preparation of a Final Scope, which will lead to a Draft SEIS and another opportunity for comments.
Supporters of the project want the environmental review to proceed quickly without impediment to Forest City, suggesting the process portends delay for Phase 2, though Phase 1 is still in process. They have not said they want to change the contract deadlines.
BrooklynSpeaks summary
The full BrooklynSpeaks statement is embedded at bottom. Below are paragraphs from the statement distributed for the press.
The need to eliminate blight:
We note that the need for a SEIS was cited prior to the approval of the 2009 MGPP [Modified General Project Plan], not only by our organizations but by nearly every local elected official representing the neighborhoods surrounding the Atlantic Yards project. We sincerely regret that litigation was required to compel the study anticipated by the draft scope, but look forward to working constructively with the ESDC to ensure that the SEIS it prepares will be a new starting point from which the stated objectives of the Atlantic Yards project can be achieved on a timely basis, through a transparent process with public accountability. As its core deliverable, the SEIS must reconcile the stated purpose of the Atlantic Yards project to eliminate purported blight, with the 2009 MGPP’s potential of extending the exact same blight some 15 years past the timeframe given for completion of the Atlantic Yards project at the time of its approval in 2006. In the absence of such reconciliation, we find these two positions antithetical, particularly given that a pattern of investment and organic development had already been established in the area within the project footprint prior to Atlantic Yards’ 2006 approval. It will not be enough for the SEIS to conclude that construction impacts are not greater over 25 years than they otherwise would be over 10 years. The Atlantic Yards project itself was approved to address a blight condition so onerous that hundreds of millions of dollars of direct and indirect government aid, zoning overrides and the use of eminent domain all were apparently justified. There would appear to be some public interest in such blighted conditions being remediated in a timely fashion, and the SEIS should determine whether delaying the completion of the project supports that interest.
The need to protect the public during construction:
But to the extent the SEIS nevertheless should conclude that extending project construction by nearly a generation would not create additional adverse impact to local communities, it must be prepared to explain how commitments to protect air quality, limit construction noise, manage contention for on-street parking between construction workers and residents, and control the use of residential streets by construction vehicles will be enforced. Violations of these commitments during the construction of the Barclays Center arena were well documented not only by residents but also by the ESDC’s own environmental monitor, leading an independent environmental engineer to conclude that ESDC and the City of New York in effect allowed Forest City Ratner to break project commitments and City law with impunity. Why should the public believe later phases of the Atlantic Yards project will be different? This question must be answered thoroughly and with candor.
The lingering impacts of Phase 1:
Nor is it sufficient for the SEIS to limit its scope of analysis to Atlantic Yards’ second phase footprint. Current project agreements allow the development of features of Phase I, including building B1 and the entire Site 5, to extend beyond the originally-approved 10-year time frame. Analyses involving the impacts of construction on transportation and pedestrian circulation must be revisited for the entire project site based upon current conditions and existing plans.
The delay in affordable housing:
The SEIS must also assess the time value of economic development and affordable housing benefits ascribed to the Atlantic Yards project. Would thousands of affordable apartments delivered fifteen years late really be as effective in terms of preserving socioeconomic diversity in the study area as if they were delivered on the originally approved schedule? And what would the delay in adding tens of thousands of residents mean to the development of businesses in Fort Greene, Prospect Heights, Park Slope and Boerum Hill?
The delay in open space:
What about the “temporary” open space impact cited in the draft scope of work? The build year guidelines in the CEQR Technical Manual would suggest that an interim build year based on the contractual obligation to complete Phase I in 12 years be considered as a point at which the open space impact must be mitigated—with or without the Phase II buildings.
The need to consider other developers
The press statement says:
The BrooklynSpeaks sponsors believe that when all of the above impacts are considered together, they indicate that an alternative plan for the development of Phase II of the Atlantic Yards project must be evaluated. This alternative plan should focus on the opportunity to restore the original 10-year construction plan by dividing the Phase II site among multiple development teams through a competitive bidding process. Had ESDC not withheld disclosure of the change in project schedule in 2009 in order to avoid a SEIS, exploring this alternative would have made good sense at the time. With intense development activity in downtown Brooklyn today, it is no longer a matter of simple good sense, it is imperative that it be explored in order to realize the stated goals of the Atlantic Yards project.
The longer BrooklynSpeaks document points to evidence from development conditions nearby:
FCRC has asserted that historically poor, and unanticipated, market conditions gave rise to the lengthy delay agreed to in the 2009 MGPP. To the extent that this rationale had even a theoretical foundation at the time, it is demonstrably not the case today: Brooklyn, particularly the downtown area, is the hottest real estate market in New York City. With new development projects moving up Flatbush Avenue and into the BAM cultural district slated to break ground over the next two years, there is yet more to come. These projects include the Gotham with 600 units of which 300 are affordable, Two Trees’ BAM triangle with 300 units of which 60 are deeply affordable, The HUB by Steiner, 770 units of which 149 are deeply affordable and permanent. Clearly, the Brooklyn real estate market is not in a recession and the area in question likely never was. One must ask, was the delay embodied in the MGPP instead caused by the financial condition of the sole source developer and not the market? The SEIS must thoroughly study and analyze this question with hard data and candor.
All of the projects about to break ground also provide thousands of square feet of cultural facilities, public plazas, public library and retail space. The land in the cultural district is controlled by the City of New York which has negotiated to bring major public benefits to these projects. For example, the Gotham has the same ratio of affordability in terms of unit count and distribution as B2 in the Atlantic Yards project – except in the latter, only 20% of affordable units would be two bedrooms, while in the Gotham, 40% are 2 bedroom units. The difference is striking: 36 vs. 120 two-bedroom units. The City’s model of multiple sites and a variety of developers is thus far yielding greater public benefit. It presents an alternative that begs for evaluation.
No Independent Compliance Monitor
The BrooklynSpeaks document (not the press statement) points to Forest City Ratner's failure to hire an Independent Compliance Monitor (ICM) promised “as soon as reasonably practicable” following the signing of the agreement in 2005 but continually delayed, with no current plans to hire one:
The SEIS must assess the impact of failing to hire the ICM on the incidents of violations of the MEC [Memorandum of Environmental Commitments] during arena construction. The SEIS must also propose how an environmental compliance function accountable to the local community will be provided for future phases of construction that will not suffer the same fate as the ICM.
DDDB statement
The DDDB statement, via attorney Jeff Baker, is at bottom. Below are some excerpts.
The potted history:
The Introduction of the Draft Scope misstates the procedural posture of this project and the circumstances that gave rise to this SEIS. Unmentioned in the Draft Scope is that in 2009, faced with major changes in the project, namely the phased acquisition of the Vanderbilt Yards by FCRC from the MTA, ESDC continued to assume a 10-year buildout for the project as the basis for its SEQRA determination.... The SEIS must properly recount the history of the litigation and subsequent reviews.
Helping the developer:
It must also be pointed out that Justice Friedman did not simply order the preparation of an SEIS, she also ordered ESDC to use the SEIS to issue "further findings on whether to approve the MGPP for Phase II of the Project. To properly comply with the law and the court's order ESDC must undertake this review without blinders designed to protect FCRC...
Bidding out the site to alleviate blight:
As part of the SEIS, ESDC must consider the impacts of the delayed construction on such issues as community character, traffic, noise and socioeconomic impacts, to name a few. It also must consider the question of what project and/or combination of development partners is best positioned to actually build the project in the shortest reasonable time. If the purpose of the project is to alleviate blight and to provide housing, affordable and market as well as construction and permanent jobs, then ESDC must consider if this can be accomplished in less than 25 years... The SEIS should include that [financial] information and consider an alternative that divides the project into discrete components that can be developed by different firms.
Alternate plans:
ESDC should consider alternate designs and densities and evaluate the benefits of working with other developers to complete a feasible project in a reasonable period of time... If blight was a problem in 2006, the intervening actions by FCRC have not alleviated that problem...
Open space needs:
If allowed to proceed as previously approved, the project will exacerbate the lack of open space in the area... The SEIS should consider if a redesign and division of the project will allow quicker construction that will bring the touted open space benefits to reality in a quicker manner.
Construction impacts:
Furthermore, as part of the approvals for the project there were representations and warranties regarding FCRC's and ESDC's compliance with the conditions and monitoring of FCRC's compliance. The SEIS should include an assessment of that compliance and determine if additional measures should be incorporated for Phase II.
As BrooklynSpeaks points out in its full comments, a study by a prepared for Atlantic Yards Watch by a veteran environmental consulting firm, concludes that the Forest City Ratner and its contractors, bent on getting the arena finished by a tight deadline, regularly failed to comply with mitigation protocols officially agreed to, and that other mitigations were implemented late, poorly, or unevenly.
This has been updated (and will be further updated).
Only the project east of 6th Avenue is being considered
The hearing Feb. 27 on the parameters for the court-ordered environmental review of Atlantic Yards Phase 2 included predictable--if quite current--testimony on the benefits of Barclays Center jobs and pedestrian activity, and the community impacts of 24/7 construction, removal of trees, and arena noise.
But the testimony regarding the Draft Scope for a Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) essentially turned on one thing: should the state consider rescinding Forest City Ratner’s control of the Atlantic Yards site to deliver project benefits (11 towers in Phase 2, with housing and open space) in the once-promised ten years, or should the new round of review be disposed of quickly to remove impediments to Forest City?
Though the developer had about ten people (plus lawyers and lobbyist) in the audience at St. Francis College, no representative testified. Instead, allies--from the Downtown Brooklyn Partnership, the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce, Brooklyn Academy of Music, the Brooklyn Navy Yard, and others--served as proxies, urging that the SEIS be finished expeditiously.
Turnout was light, but the peak was more than 100 people. All photos (except top) and set by Tracy Collins.
The Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC, or ESD) approve Atlantic Yards in 2006, then re-approved the project in 2009, concluding there was no need for an SEIS. Community groups later went to court challenging the re-approval and, after losing in the first round, got a judge to order an SEIS.
Given that Forest City is still working on the first of at least three (of a potential five) buildings in Phase 1 (the arena block and Site 5), it was unclear exactly how this process delays Phase 2. There must be a Draft SEIS and public hearing before the final SEIS is surely approved by Empire State Development, which has long worked cooperatively with the developer and is unlikely to recommend dividing up the site.
Linh Do of AKRF describes the draft scope; presiding is hearing officer Edward Kramer
So, given the sequence so far, it's unclear whether this does more than leave some business uncertainty over financing.
Or perhaps Forest City, which has said publicly it intends to build over the surface parking lot--the only piece of Phase 2 that’s terra firm--before it builds an expensive platform over the blighted Vanderbilt Yard, is concerned that this review process might force more rapid expenditure for such a platform. Written comments are due by March 15.
Perhaps the most dramatic contrast came in testimony from non-profit housing advocates; a Forest City partner warned the dividing up the site would not deliver housing faster and cheaper, while others warned that delays would make people currently eligible for the 900 low-income units (of 2250 subsidized apartments) ineligible, the victims of rapidly rising Area Median Income (AMI).
Project parameters accepted
In row: ESDC attorney Kevin Healy; Prospect Heights resident Wayne Bailey; FCR attorney Jeffrey Braun
More than 100 people were present, and perhaps 30 testified. Though perhaps half of the speakers in the three-hour hearing were critical of the project, Forest City had to feel good that most of that criticism accepted the project as approved and merely sought to get the benefits--including the removal of the purported blight--delivered faster, rather than request a project that’s less dense or opens up new streets.
Those provisions are among the principles of the BrooklynSpeaks coalition, which supplied most of the speakers, though a few activists long associated with Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn--which fought the project in court and has essentially receded--did testify.
Michael D.D. White
(See Michael D.D. White's testimony on the "necessary dismantling" of Forest City's monopoly and the "rolling disaster" of the project.)
The Draft SEIS will consider three scenarios: continuous sequential phasing of the 11 buildings, in a clockwise movement as long illustrated; continuous construction, but starting on the southeast parking block, 1129; or a start-and-stop process. The review also will consider the use of modular construction, which is Forest City’s plan.
While Forest City had support from those associated with the defunct (but apparently not-quite-dead) Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development, or BUILD, and the business and cultural community, it had new allies: some workers at the arena, as well as developers of nearby properties. Other than housing advocates, those affiliated with BUILD constituted representatives of the controversial Community Benefits Agreement (CBA).
Not present, however, was a representative of the umbrella Building and Construction Trades Council, who's in sympathy with arena workers who are protesting part-time work at low pay and wanted to decertify their union--though a decertification vote today reportedly failed.
Elected officials: Levin
Only one elected official, Council Member Steve Levin, was present. (Council Member Letitia James and state Senator Velmanette Montgomery joined Levin in a pre-hearing press release calling for the study of a ten-year buildout.)
“The constituents I represent are dealing with the effects of the arena and the surrounding development on a daily basis,” Levin said. “As many in the community have stated, the approval of the 2009 MGPP [Modified General Project Plan] seems to be at odds with the goal of removing blight from the area within the Atlantic Yards project.”
“I believe that the SEIS must address a range of issues from construction noise and housing.. to available open space... and it ought to study the 10-year buildout as an alternative scenario," he said. "The SEIS must address the impact of the delayed affordable housing units.”
“The Atlantic Yards project is truly unprecedented in terms of its size and scope, but it does not mean it does not have to conform to the standards we hold to any other developer to,” Levin said, missing the opportunity to point out that the state override of zoning means that there are in fact special standards.
“The community has put up with far too many problems and will likely deal with many more issues over the years,” he said. “At the very least, the promises made to local residents should be delivered sooner rather than later. I implore ESDC to be vigilant and to hold FCRC to its promises.”
Elected officials: Markowitz rep
Borough President Marty Markowitz sent a representative, Luke DePalma, who spoke briefly to cite "the Borough President’s complete support for this project. Barclays Center has been a success. Brooklyn now has a world class arena and a major league team, soon to be two.
"And construction has begun on the first residential tower, with more on the way," he said. "Congrats to FCRC and ESD for their continued good work."
Such enthusiasm without any recognition of community concerns surely reflects Markowitz's position in the last year of his last term, without any need to appeal to potential voters of mixed opinion.
Veconi on the timetable
"I've been to quite a few Atlantic Yards hearings over the last six years,” said Gib Veconi of BrooklynSpeaks. "This seems like a nice one so far." (Indeed, compared to the raucous hearings of 2006, with cheers and boos, this was generally calm, with a smattering of claps for certain speakers and relatively few speakers determined to speak after being told their time was up.)
"There are probably some people who think Atlantic Yards is a good project, and I think there are some people who think it's not," Veconi said. "Tonight, I think we can put those question aside, because the hearings on those questions happened six years ago.”
"Tonight, we have an opportunity to talk about something I think we will all agree on: how long should this project take to get built," he said, noting that ESDC "tried to conceal" changes that gave Forest City 25 years to build the project.
(The Master Development Agreement, or MDA, was revealed only after the project was passed and not until after the first hearing in the lawsuit challenging the 2009 re-approval of the project. Supreme Court Justice Marcy Friedman in March 2010 ruled for the state, upholding project approval, then re-opened the case and allowed the MDA into the record, and then ruled against the state and Forest City, which unsuccessfully appealed.)
"So, if you like Atlantic Yards... would you rather see the jobs and affordable housing in 10 years or in 25 years?" Veconi asked. "If you don't like Atlantic Yards, because you’re concerned about some of the construction impacts.. or some of the open space impacts, do you want to endure those for ten years, or for 25 years?"
“The bad news is on page 4 of the Draft Scope... where it says that the reason the 2009 MGPP was approved was due to ‘difficult economic conditions.’ Now, it must’ve been pretty bad if they had to go from 10 years to 25 years.”
“The good news, I think, is that on Monday,” Veconi continued, “Bruce Ratner gave an interview to Bloomberg Television, where he said there's never been a better time to be a residential real estate developer in New York City... and Brooklyn is the best place to be. So it doesn’t sound like the difficult economic conditions apply, at least not in Mr. Ratner's view.”
“Since on page 2, the court says this project was remanded to conduct... and further findings on whether to approve the MGPP for Phase 2 of the project. So I tonight would like to ask the ESDC... to consider whether the grounds for the 2009 MGPP are still valid, and whether this project can in fact be built in 10 years, as it was originally approved.”
“I'd like them to do that by talking to Forest City Ratner about amending the MDA and the MGPP to the ten-year schedule," Veconi said. "And if Forest City doesn't want to do that, I'd like to see ESDC as part of the SEIS do what governments do best and issue an RFP for developers who can do this project in ten years.”
Forest City's housing partner #1
Amelia Adams, Deputy Director at ACORN successor New York Communities for Change, said, “I think we’re pretty happy we have an arena, but the focus should be on this affordable housing. For far too long, New Yorkers are struggling to find an affordable place to live... There are people at our office, day in and day out, looking for affordable housing.”
“This Phase 2 needs to happen expeditiously, because affordable housing is scarce," she said. " This won’t not solve the problem that the city has, will put a small dent in it. The city has a really really really hard time... finding affordable housing for working families and low income families.
"On that note, we really need to push the tiered income and mix of apartments. We cannot get a whole bunch of one-bedrooms and studios," she said. "We really need to push for two- and three bedrooms so that actual families can call Downtown Brooklyn their neighborhood.” It wasn't clear who she was pushing: Forest City Ratner, which failed to follow its promise of larger units, or city funders who allocate subsidies on a per-unit, rather than per-bedroom, basis.
“As Empire State is the lead agency on this," she said, "we’re really urging you by any means necessary to go forward on Phase 2 for the affordable housing.” But expeditious environmental review likely would only ratify the existing 25-year deadline.
Forest City's housing partner #2
Ismene Speliotis, executive director of ACORN successor Mutual Housing Association of New York (MHANY) and MHANY Management, said they made a decision along with ACORN, and currently with NYCC [New York Communities for Change] and The Black Institute [led by former ACORN head Bertha Lewis]. to be part of the CBA and to work very hard from the inside to influence and hold Forest City and Atlantic Yards project accountable.”
She said it was “a very big deal” to get the first tower started, because there are units available for people making from 40% to 160% of AMI: “We worked really to hard to make sure that there were bands, so that there would be something for everybody.”
“Clearly, in the first building, there are not enough large apartments,” she said, hinting at the divergence between the promise that 50% of affordable space would be devoted to two- and three-bedroom units, while only 20% of the 181 units would be two-bedroom ones. (She didn’t mention that the latter are skewed toward the upper-income bands.)
“I think we did really well on the incomes, and I think we have to do really well on the apartment sizes in the next phases,” she said. “I the the way to do it is to not slow it down but to actually keep plowing ahead.”
“The commitment by Forest City of 2500 affordable rental apartments [actually 2250] and 600 ownership apartments on and off site is a real commitment,” she said, but advocates need to ensure it gets built.
In closing, she responded to critics, though without detail: “I just want to say this idea of carving it up and divvying it up to other developers...we should be very careful.” She cited testimony from another developer building a project that’s 80% market, 20% subsidized. “We know what’s been built. This is 50/50 affordable development project and we believe that carving it up does not necessarily make it cheaper, faster, or will it make it more affordable.”
Of course, given that MHANY is partnering on recruiting the tenants, it also would be an institutional blow.
Delay prices out potential tenants?
Michelle de la Uz, Executive Director of the Fifth Avenue Committee, a member of BrooklynSpeaks that builds and manage affordable housing, noted that the majority of low, moderate, and middle income households earning 30-125% of AMI who’d be eligible for affordable housing if it’s built in the first ten years would not not be eligible for same units if they're built in 25 years. (Note that Forest City would not be building all the housing at the end.)
“The HUD Area Median income for a family of four in the New York metropolitan area in 1990 was a little less than $37,000 a year,” de la Uz said, “Twenty-three years later, that number has nearly doubled, and AMI for New York City is $71,400 for a family of four.” Given that the least-advantaged households eligible for Atlantic Yards affordable housing must earn 30% of AMI, a rising AMI would render them ineligible.
Note that it’s unlikely that AMI will rise at the rapid pace of the last few decades, but there’s already a significant mismatch between Brooklyn income and AMI, since it’s based on a region that includes affluent suburban counties.
She also noted that, because of ongoing gentrification, “there are likely to be continued changes in the racial and ethnic makeup of Community Board 8 that will disadvantage African-Americans in a lottery that takes place in 2035 rather than 2010.”
Members of the three community districts, CBs 2, 6, and 8, were initially given priority, as one half of the units in the lottery would be restricted to them. That lottery has since been expanded to include Community Board 3, in Bedford-Stuyvesant.
The advantages of bidding
Deb Howard, executive director of the Pratt Area Community Council, another BrooklynSpeaks member, urged study of dividing the site “among multiple development teams in a competitive bidding process... adding resources, expanding access to financing, and reducing development risk.”
Howard said the buildout at corridor of Livingston and Schermerhorn streets in Downtown Brooklyn “is a particularly good example,” as it has combined affordability and diversity of housing, using multiple developers.
“Clearly the Brooklyn real estate market is not in a recession,” she said. ““One has to ask: Is the delay, instead, caused by the financial condition of the sole source developer and not the market?”
She noted that projects on city-owned land in the BAM Cultural District include cultural facilities at the base.
“Can't the state, in guise of the ESDC and MTA, bring more public benefit to Atlantic Yards site by utilizing a competitive process and multiple developers,” leading to a variety of housing, deeper affordability, community facilities, and cultural facilities, Howard said in closing.
Neighborhood impacts
Peter Krashes of the Dean Street Block association pointed out that the source of the delay--and the reduction of the public value of the project--was Forest City Ratner’s request for an extended schedule.
It’s also a result of the state failing to look at the “true feasibility of the project,” he charged. Too much of the environmental analysis appears to give the developer flexibility.
Krashes noted that the construction of the arena has been delinked from the other Phase 1 buildings and the “construction method now differs from what was analyzed.”
And while the hearing--as the illustration at top indicated--was focused on Phase 2, he said that B1, the office tower slated to loom over the plaza, “may be constructed at any point.” He asked for details about traffic/sidewalk impacts from the construction of that building and also Site 5, now the home of P.C. Richard and Modell’s, but slated for a tower.
He said other issues need to be studied, such as the post-event surge of pedestrians, the presence of an additional arena entrance, and the parking that blocks the sidewalks of Sixth Avenue.
Support from nearby developers
Juliet Cullen-Cheung, a VP at the real estate developer Steiner NYC, noted that she was in charge of developing an 80/20 rental building in Downtown Brooklyn along Flatbush Avenue, with 750 units, 150 of them subsidized.
“From the interest of our company, this [Atlantic Yards] development will definitely improve the economic bottom line of that project. it will help the retail spaces be filled,” she said. “From a neighborhood perspective, I am also a Downtown Brooklyn resident, I'm on my condo board at the Toren, I’d like to see this development get built.”
Cullen-Cheung noted that her project has been in planning for two years and it will take four years more to get built. “I would like to see it get built fast, but I also understand how long things take, especially with additional public review,” she concluded. “ I would like to see ESDC move forward quickly with the Draft SEIS so we can see the benefits from this project."
Stan Spiegelman
Offering similar testimony was Stan Spiegelman of GFI Development, which has converted 470 Vanderbilt into an office building (to be used by the city Human Resources Administration) and claimed that the lease would have been difficult without Atlantic Yards.
GFI also controls the lease for a development on the parking lot, and said lenders and capital partners view timely commencement of Phase 2 as helpful. “We ask that you complete the necessary work quickly, so any barriers to investment will be removed.”
Does delay benefit no one?
Michael Cairl, president of the Park Slope Civic Council, a BrooklynSpeaks member organization, contended that “a 25-year project period benefits no one. It doesn’t benefit residents who suffer from the impacts of construction.. people who need affordable housing.. a diminishing number of construction workers... It doesn't benefit people getting a diminishing number of permanent jobs...it doesn't benefit the city that has to await completion over a longer period to realize the full benefits.”
He also said it “doesn't benefit the developer,” since the longer it takes to build, longer it takes to generate a return.” That of course is in debate, since the developer has refinanced the project with cheap capital from immigrant investors seeking green cards.
“With all due respect to the previous speaker, the whole point of this is not to speed up the SEIS and slap together and call it a day,” he said. “We cannot stand for a slapdash SEIS.. it has to be full, it has to be well considered... it has to consider a full range of all impacts. It has to be supported by data. We expect nothing less and, quite frankly, the project sponsor should expect nothing less."
Official backing
Jessica Walker of the business group Partnership for NYC noted that the group had consistently supported Atlantic Yards and “reaffirm that support more strongly than ever, as the benefits begin to be realized.” She cited 2000 new jobs at the arena without acknowledging that 1900 are part-time, with no benefits.
“Good things are happening, but the most significant public benefits will be realized in the second phase,” Walker said. “We urge ESD to complete the necessary work to move forward quickly, so obstacles to the realization of new housing, including affordable housing, eight acres of publicly accessible open space and other public benefits can be removed, and development of Phase 2 can begin.”
Prolonged blight
Jo Anne Simon, female District Leader for the 52nd Assembly District, testified that the SEIS must study the effect of prolonging the blight associated with the railyards, as well as the continued impact of a blighting influence.
Moreover, she said, given that Block 1129, now home to the parking lot, once included residential, light manufacturing, and an artistic business (unmentioned: the largest building was vacant), the SEIS must determine whether the demolition and replacement with parking extended the blight.
Simon noted--though it’s outside the scope of the ESDC review--that Forest City still hasn’t hired the Independent Compliance Monitor promised for the project. And, she pointed out, construction “occurred virtually 24/7,” which meant some promised mitigations were never enforced.
The view from North Flatbush
Regina Cahill, president of North Flatbush Business Improvement District, said she’d moved to Flatbush Avenue in 1975: “You want to know about blight, I have stories... many of my members are saying ‘hallelujah,’” given the influx of new customers and growth in the area.
While she recognized that issues regarding traffic and pedestrians and noise must be addressed, Cahill said things should move forward.
“Many of my fellow neighbors talk about organic development,” she said, observing that “you can have one tenant and be horrible landlord... We ask for humanity, we ask for housing, we ask for the project to be moved forward. I worry if we divide it up into several construction sites at all at one time, the mass effect of everybody trying to communicate, whether deliveries are happening, whether the community is going to be impacted, is going to be horrendous.”
Michael Pintchik
Michael Pintchik of Pintchik Hardware, a major landowner along Flatbush, said that he was relieved that any trepidation regarding arena impacts had been allayed, with Forest City Ratner, for example, taking care of garbage.
“I’m here to encourage, not a slipshod, but an expeditious EIS process, so the housing can get built,” he said, suggesting, based on his guess rather than any inside information, “that the schedule will surprise everyone.”
"The idea of hope"
Though BUILD went out of business last year, facing a debt to the Internal Revenue Service and a complaint to the state Attorney General over improper spending, there was no mention of that. Nor was there any mention of the lawsuit filed by those in a coveted pre-employment training program who have sued for unpaid wages and the value of promised union cards and construction careers.
In fact, several people referred to BUILD as if it were still active.
Gregory Tyner, a former life skills instructor at BUILD, said he wanted "to speak about the idea of hope.
“We were all very excited about being connected to the project," he said. "To offer a person who has nothing to opportunity to be a part of history is very powerful."
"As a life skills instruction at BUILD," he reflected, "our clients were unemployed, or underemployed. They showed feelings of helplessness, which led to anger, anger which led to depression. The idea of being part of an opportunity turned helplessness into inspiration, and their depression to proactive thinking.”
An arena worker
Darren Frazier testified as “a representative of the BUILD organization, James Caldwell is our CEO.”
Frazier said he was a graduate of a BUILD customer service training program aimed to prepare people for work at the arena, and he’s now working at the Barclays Center.
Though some others affiliated with BUILD offered unequivocal praise for the project, Frazier suggested that the ESDC do more to educate people on how to qualify for some of the affordable housing.
A BUILD board member
Evangeline Porter said, “I speak on behalf of the community at large” and cited her role as founder of the Crow Hill Community Association focused on Franklin Avenue in Crown Heights. (She didn’t mention that she was a board member of BUILD and of the 77th Precinct Community Council, also led by Caldwell.)
“It was not always the best place to be,” she said of Franklin Avenue. “It is one of the nicest places to be in at this point in time.. I have been very actively involved in the community, with the BUILD program, to my estimation, one of the best programs that came into Brooklyn.” She cited work helping job-seekers with their GEDs and customer service training.
“Rome was not built in a day, so why are we complaining about how long its taking them to build affordable housing and all of this good stuff,” Porter said.
“Nobody complained when they were re-building Yankee Stadium,” she declared, prompting much pushback from audience members who recalled that the city appropriated public park space.
Porter was undeterred, stating, “I've been in Brooklyn for 60-some years. And I remember what it was and what it wasn't. As far as BUILD is considered, as far as Barclays is considered, I think it is one of the best things that could have happened to Downtown Brooklyn.”
BUILD's role
Caldwell didn't testify, but he did observe the hearing from the audience. After the hearing, I asked him if he was involved in recruiting speakers. “BUILD shut down,” he replied. “I lost all my telephone numbers.”
Monique Moody
I noted that the speakers were saying they represented BUILD. For example, Monique Moody described herself as an employee of the Barclays Center and speaking “on behalf” of “the BUILD corporation... I would like to take this time to thank Forest City Ratner for building the arena."
Caldwell said they were “just coming to say thank you... but we’re out of the business.” Others around him said they'd kept up with the project.
I asked if Caldwell still had any business or consulting relationship with Forest City.
He said yes, but declined to elaborate. Forest City Ratner's Jane Marshall deflected questions to Executive VP Ashley Cotton, who'd already left the building (and pretty much ignores my questions these days).
The impact of modular
Jim Vogel, a 34-year resident of Pacific Street near Fourth Avenue (and, unmentioned, an aide to state Senator Velmanette Montgomery), said “It is refreshing to see that this EIS [hearing] has not turned into a circus... but the people who were brought in by the developer, the unions and the desperately poor people who were made all these promises, were pretty shamelessly exploited, and they're not here today. I don’t find that a proud moment, but I do find it telling.”
“The ESDC is supposed to be managing this project,” he said. “It is not supposed to be taking orders from Forest City Ratner... It is the ESDC's responsibility to deliver the promised public benefits while it can benefit residents currently suffering through being an ongoing construction project.”
He said the agency should “share a fire study on the admittedly experimental modular” building plan, since such structures “have relatively no concrete to act as buffer.”
In a reference to the lower pay for workers in the modular factory, he said “ESDC should study and publish the economic consequences of bait and switch of union construction jobs with standard techniques versus modular.”
Local impacts
Wayne Bailey of the nearby residential building Newswalk testified that "residents have no reasonable expectation when the [railyard] platform will be built... As Forest City Ratner has said publicly, they control the pace."
"There have been very significant impacts" from construction, including noise, traffic, congestion, loss of parking, and never-ending Long Island Rail Road construction, he said, adding that, had there been "promised independent oversight, then the community wouldn't have created Atlantic Yards Watch to document impacts. Lights at the railyard "are as many lights as you'd have with a baseball field."
He cited a July 2012 report by Sandstone Environmental Associates that documented various violations of construction protocols.
"Nothing, it seems, has been the construction activity's fault or the answer is, nothing can be done because you live next to a construction zone," he said, citing "weeks of 60+ daily arrival of dump trucks... that illegally idle for hours, beep, blast music next to our building."
The role of the consultant
Patti Hagan, the original activist against the project, stated that "even another Potemkin hearing is something, I guess."
She described herself as "34-year resident of the Prospect Heights historic district, now in my 10th year of testifying about the abuse of Forest City Ratner, with the full collusion of New York City and State government."
"Forgive me if I say that this whole decade of trying to speak reasonably against this backwards, top-down much derided, Robert Moses type [development]... has left me profoundly cynical that I or any of my fellow citizens have any place in this New York participatory democracy, so-called."
She opined that the original environmental review, "fabricated" by ubiquitous consultant AKRF "will no doubt be supplanted by another 25-year no-impact AKRF SEIS since AKRF is the custom designer of no-impact EIS's for the Bruce Ratners of the world.”
The developer-government alliance
The 2099 approvals, observed Terry Urban of the East Pacific Street Block Association, "to Forest City Ratner certain modifications that solely benefited the developer's bottom line notwithstanding their blighting effects on the very community this project was purported to enhance."
“We are now asking for that same ESD" that joined Forest City Ratner in misleading representations in the court case, she said, "to demonstrate some renewed integrity and take an honest hard look at the impacts of Phase 2 of this project."
The platform over the railyard, she said, “should have been your first milestone if you were truly interested in providing us with public benefits.”
She later noted that nearly all the arena jobs touted are part-time, without benefits.
Idling cars
Steve Ettlinger, a 30-year resident of north Park Slope, stressed the operating impacts of the arena: "Quite often, I've found many illegally parked cars, also many of them are idling... on my one block alone, I found 25 illegally parked cars."
"This has been since October, I believe it’s an easy problem to solve," he said. "I think we should hold their feet to the fire more vigorously." The idling cars also cause air quality impacts and affect pedestrians.
"Because of the extended buildout, the area is less attractive to possible new tenants," he said, describing himself as a "small-time landlord."
"We need more jobs now, we need to create them in ten years, we need more affordable housing," he said. "We need to recover the value of the undervalued public land that Forest City was given, under the public streets." Thus he encouraged new development partners and potentially more commercial space for jobs.
A slam on ACORN
Lucy Koteen, active in Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn, the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats, and the Fort Greene Association, asked, "What's the difference between ten years and 25... in ten years, most likely, I will be alive... in 25 years, there’s a very good chance I will be dead... perhaps only Prokhorov will not be dead, and by then he may own the whole project."
And so it goes, she said, for the people who were promised an affordable family-sized apartment but won't get it.
She recalled a meeting where ACORN's Bertha Lewis promised that ten percent of the affordable housing would be set aside for Brooklyn seniors.
(That's promised as a goal on p. 25 of the Community Benefits Agreement, which says the units may be concentrated in one building to provide services. There's no plan for senior housing in the first tower, B2 nor any announced timetable for senior housing.)
"What a cruel joke," Koteen recalled. "When asked if FCR did not deliver, she said, I will tear this city up. But no Bertha, you are just another liar. I see no signs of you or anyone else tearing the city up over promises broken by Forest City Ratner. You are just a shill, like all the others who took money from FCR."
She also questioned whether those displaced from the footprint would get an apartment in an Atlantic Yards tower as promised. At least as reported by the Daily News, a "handful" of people who took that deal will go to the first tower.
Some whimsy from a long-time combatant
Near the end of the hearing, Robert Puca, a resident of the nearby Newswalk building, was playful, pointing to the familiar faces in the room, including lawyers and the hearing officer, Edward Kramer.
“I now have more gray hair from all the negative impacts I’ve been dealing with,” he said. “For example, my son now lives with his mother in a separate area, because, when the construction was going on, he couldn't handle the noise and the vibration.”
Puca scoffed at the justification that the project was approved to remove blight, saying, “they're not going to build a deck over the supposedly blighted railyard ‘til 25 years are up. (Actually, a deck must be started in 15 years.)
“It’s amazing,” he said sarcastically, that condos in his building cost a million dollars before the project was approved and still do.
“Forest City Ratner’s cutting down trees on Pacific Street,” he said, citing a much-reportedcomplaint. “We fought to get those trees on the block.. now they're being cut down and there’s no timetable to replace it.”
“Another negative impact: when there's concerts going on, there's massive vibrations in Newswalk building, the whole building shakes,” he said, playfully proposing that the arena might be encased “in another skin.”
“Also, I just want to say that, thank god for all of my fellow activists,” he said. “We almost won. If it wasn't for [Nets majority owner Mikhail] Prokhorov, we would've won and [Bruce] Ratner wouldn’t have built this... I wonder if the ESDC and governor would've been so for the project if they would have known if it was subsidizing not only Ratner the billionaire [actually, he’s not] but a Russian oligarch who’s also a billionaire.”
He didn't get an answer, but do note that Prokhorov's investment, surely negotiated in 2009 before the re-approval of the project, was not announced until after that re-approval.
But the 22-page report, conducted by Minneapolis-based Newmerical Technologies International for AKRF, the consultancy that conducted most of the environmental impact analysis, focused on the impact of wind on sitting, walking, and standing, but not on temperature. (The study was not formally included in the environmental review but later released.)
