• Domino Sells

    DUMBO-based Two Trees has closed their deal for the Domino sugar refinery site, for what appears to be $185 million ($20 million more than the price that Two Trees supposedly went into the negotiations at). According to the Times, the price increase came after co-owner Isaac Katan made an offer with developers Chetrit Group and David Bistricer for $185 million. The price is a handsome return for co-owners CPC Resources and Katan, who bought the property in 2004 for $55 million and spent 6 years securing a rezoning for the residential use of the site (though Katan apparently doesn’t think it’s such a great return).

    What does the new owner have in mind for the project? Two Trees principal Jed Walentas is quoted in the Times as saying that there are “probably some opportunities to make improvements on the plans”. The Rafael Viñoly plans shown during the public review for the site’s rezoning are non-binding, so a redesign of the building skin is certainly possible (and I’d bet likely). So too is a redesign of the Landmarks-approved addition to the Refinery building (the current model was designed by Beyer Blinder Belle).

    But what of all the promises that CPCR made to the local community during the rezoning process? The open space is largely codified into the zoning for the site (and by general waterfront access plan requirements), as are the building heights and general uses (retail, office, residential).

    But the big promise – the one that brought a lot of community into CPCR’s fold – was affordable housing. 660 units of it. Rob Solano, a supporter of the CPCR rezoning told the Times: “It’s extremely important that the Domino project is built with all the affordable housing that was promised”.

    The Daily News asked the question that is on the minds of CPCR’s community supporters, and the response should not be reassuring:

    The new developer of the iconic Domino Sugar Factory hedged Thursday on whether the new deal would include affordable housing.

    “There were promises made by another developer. We literally just brought the property today so I don’t know,” said Stefan Friedman, a spokesman for Two Trees Management Co.

    Two Trees is an experienced developer (unlike CPCR), but they are an experienced developer of luxury and market-rate housing. As I’ve said before, they are a good fit for this project in that they have experience with old buildings, experience with big (and complicated) developments, a commitment to good design and a very long-term investment philosophy (and they are certainly better than Katan-Chetrit-Bistricer partnership would have been). But affordable housing is not their thing, and if, after two or three weeks of due diligence on a $185 million deal, they are being coy on the affordable question, that should make people in the community pretty nervous. Maybe Two Trees is thinking about who to partner with to do the affordable housing (a smart move), but it’s a pretty good bet that they are also looking at the number or percentage of units.

    Two Trees is right – the promises were made by another developer. That other developer was able to secure a zoning density that far exceeded what any other developer on the waterfront was able to get, and in exchange for that, they promised to build a lot of affordable housing. But those promises were not binding on CPCR and they are not binding on Two Trees.

    Halden

    , , ,

  • Your Guide to a Tour of Decay

    Closing out a mini-theme on abandonment and decay, I’d be remiss in not linking to this excellent profile of Mitch Waxman from Sunday’s Times.

    Halden

    , ,

  • City Reneges on Promised Brooklyn Waterfront Parks

    Wsj map

    Source: Wall Street Journal

    I’d been meaning to write a wrap-up post on last week’s City Council hearing on the status of the 2005 rezoning of the Williamsburg & Greenpoint waterfront, including the many articles that led up to the hearing. Happily, the Working Harbor Committee has done that for me – written a concise, informed wrap-up of the many articles already written. So I’ll just link to that, put up this very excellent graphic prepared by the Wall Street Journal and pull a particularly good quote from Council Member Steve Levin:

    This is about credibility, doing what you say you’re going to do,” said Levin. “You have no concrete plan. When you want to do something, you have a plan.

    OK – and I’ll add this: since the 2005 rezoning was based on environmental assessments that assumed that the city would build parkland, at what point does the city’s failure to build that parkland (or even make good faith progress toward doing so) make the EIS a faulty instrument?

    Halden

    , ,

  • Inside the Domino Sugar Refinery

    More scenes of abandonment and decay – this time from the aptly title Abandoned NYC blog (via Business Insider, of all places).

    Raw sugar
    Raw Sugar Warehouse, interior
    Photo: Abandoned NYC


    Halden

    ,

  • Brooklyn’s Boneyard

    In the Daily Mail, a collection of photos from Williamsburg’s days (not so long ago) as a open-air chop shop.

    Cathcart church

    Photo: James Cathcart


    Halden

    , ,

  • City Won’t Promise to Finish Two Long-Stalled North Brooklyn Parks

    As the Brooklyn Paper reports, the Bloomberg administration has refused to commit to any goals or deliverables on the acquisition or construction of Bushwick Inlet Park or 65 Commercial Street. (I guess everyone has given up on the expansion of Barge Park?)

    Financial mismanagement and planning gaffes have also stood in the way of both planned open spaces.

    Bloomberg officials originally valued [the soccer field block] on the southern edge of the 28-acre Bushwick Inlet Park at about $12 million, but a judge ruled that the area’s residential rezoning meant its value was almost eight times higher.

    The city eventually settled with the property owner and bought the parcel for about $93 million, according to court papers and Council testimony…

    Money to build a park at Commercial Street dried up too.

    In 2007, city budget hawks removed $13 million of the $14 million allocated to the park’s development and spent it on other projects.

    Contrary to the headline, I don’t think anyone expects that this administration will finish either of these parks before January, 2014. But the administration can ensure that the parks will be built someday by negotiating contracts to buy all of the Bushwick Inlet properties and by moving the MTA off the Commercial Street lot once and for all.

    Neither of those actions will ensure that the parks are completed anytime soon (as I said elsewhere, we are looking at decades), but they will ensure that North Brooklyn has a clear path to getting the parks we were promised seven years ago.

    Halden

    , , , , ,

  • Brooklyn Waits on Promise of a Park

    Wsj map

    Stuck in Park
    Source: WSJ

    The Wall Street Journal has a lengthy article (and excellent graphic) on the fight to get the Bloomberg administration to follow through on the parks and affordable housing it promised Williamsburg and Greenpoint in the 2005 rezoning.

    Often there are community benefit components that make rezonings more acceptable than they otherwise would be,” said state Sen. Daniel Squadron, whose district includes the Williamsburg waterfront. “If those promises don’t mean anything, it’s going to be a lot harder to move forward with similar community-remaking projects


    Halden

    , , ,

  • Let Us Drink in the Parks

    The Post seems to be confusing private property with public parks:

    Last weekend, my family had the pleasure of eating our way through the amazing Smorgasburg food festival in Williamsburg. But, in between bites of fish tacos, sandwiches piled high with smoked meat and the obligatory sweet-and-salty s’mores, something was missing.

    Something, perhaps, like a locally crafted beer or a Long Island-produced wine. An adult beverage to complement the farm-to-table offerings would have made the day just perfect.

    Yet the city’s made that all but impossible.

    Smorgasburg (and the Brooklyn Flea) are on private property at the Edge, not in a park. Plus, they’ve already applied for, and will soon have a liquor license.

    Halden

    , ,

  • Related, Silverstein Also Looked at Domino

    The Commercial Observer has more information on the Two Trees acquisition of the Domino site, including the fact that two other major developers – The Related Companies and Silverstein Properties – were interested in the site.

    The Observer seems to agree with everyone else (myself included) that Two Trees is a good fit for the site. But the paper also seems to misunderstand some of the issues that make the property so hard to develop:

    Landmark protections at the sugar factory require that its main buildings, a square structure with the Domino logo on its facade and a behemoth brick property with a towering smokestack, be preserved. Those familiar with the site say that it would likely cost many millions of dollars to renovate and make them habitable. CPC also struck a deal with the city to build 30 percent of the project as affordable housing, a larger than normal percentage that people familiar with the development said cuts into the project’s profitability.

    The refinery (the “behemoth brick property with a towering smokestack”) is a landmark, but the bin structure (the “square structure with the Domino logo on its facade”) is not a landmark. As part of its landmark approval for the refinery, CPCR did agree to move the (not very historic) Domino Sugar sign to the refinery. But the building that the sign is attached to is toast.

    As for the affordable housing, there was no “deal” to develop 30% of the project as affordable housing. CPCR promised to do so, but significantly, neither the city nor CPCR’s community supporters thought it necessary to make that commitment binding. As I noted yesterday, there is a strong incentive for 20% affordable housing on the site, but technically, there is no requirement for any affordable housing as part of the project.

    [via Brownstoner]

    Halden

    , , , ,

  • Searching for the L Train’s ‘Silver Bullet’

    One quote from [Senator Dan] Squadron though struck a chord. As he noted that some rush hour trains will likely be below the MTA’s load guidelines, he let slip a key line. “This is not going to be the silver bullet, but this is real good news for L train riders,” he said. “Anyone tired of the crushing crowds and overflowing trains will now have an L train trip less likely to feel like hell.” What exactly does Squadron expect? What kind of silver bullet does he want? The MTA isn’t about to build a parallel line through Williamsburg or third-track the L train, and running trains every 180 seconds should be at least sufficient to ease some of the crowding concerns.

    I can’t speak for the Senator, but his comments echo my points from last Friday – there is no silver bullet on the L train. Increased service is great, and an extra train every hour or so actually will make a difference. But no amount of automation or optimization is going to going to overcome a sick passenger on a two-track line. So overcrowding and delays will remain a fact of life, and those “residual delays” tweets will keep coming.

    Halden

    , ,
About
Flickr Photo Pool
Archive

email:

brooklyn11211 [at]

brooklyn11211 [dot] com

copyright:

© 2001-2023

brooklyn11211.com