Stadium Discussion

[dummyrun]

To make any sort of comparison, we would really need to see the L+M RFEI

I've been thinking about this part. What interesting stuff would we look for if we could compare the full L+M proposal to NYCFC's?

Related question for anyone like Sabo and sammy3469 who knows a thing or two about these processes: What specific docs might we be able to track down from ESD at this stage besides the RFEI proposals?

 

[SanBartG]

No matter what the details are behind it, the mere statement that no real estate taxes will be paid by the developers of the land (and the PILOTs have a poor track record of working out as planned) is enough to support the narrative that it's subsidized.

That’s true. The public doesn’t know enough to understand the difference and they won’t spend the time to find out. They’ll rush to judgment to confirm their pre-existing beliefs and we’ll have to live with the blow back.

 

[FredMertz]

That’s true. The public doesn’t know enough to understand the difference and they won’t spend the time to find out. They’ll rush to judgment to confirm their pre-existing beliefs and we’ll have to live with the blow back.

In all fairness to the public, the overwhelming majority of deals like this in the past have not looked great with the benefit of some hindsight. The Yankee stadium deal has left a bad taste in a lot of mouths, with missed projections and unfulfilled promises.

 

[SanBartG]

In all fairness to the public, the overwhelming majority of deals like this in the past have not looked great with the benefit of some hindsight. The Yankee stadium deal has left a bad taste in a lot of mouths, with missed projections and unfulfilled promises.

I don’t disagree. And I typically oppose these deals like YS, Pru center, et al because they actually were subsidized.

So yeah, I expect the public to be skeptical. To your point- NYCFC should have a coordinated and aggressive PR campaign to get ahead of this narrative.

 

[Ulrich]

In all fairness to the public, the overwhelming majority of deals like this in the past have not looked great with the benefit of some hindsight. The Yankee stadium deal has left a bad taste in a lot of mouths, with missed projections and unfulfilled promises.

With that in mind, then it appears a lease agreement is always the best situation for the public because the municipality will always retain the equity of the land in perpetuity and can negotiate the next lease with the infrastructure value gained from the last. I’m a big proponent of not selling public resources.

 

[JGarrettLieb]

That $100M is for remediation and the platform. $25M for R and $75 for P.

Just realized something that could throw a kink into both proposals, and NYCFC's is better positioned financially to weather it, but that $75M platform that was projected last year is not gonna cost $75M, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot more thanks to recent steel tariffs. And that's just the platform. The other proposal has 7 buildings, which theoretically could be built out of concrete, but steel is the likely way to go so as not to be mixing a steel platform with concrete buildings (economy of scale and using a single sub rather than mixing two that have to work together). NYCFC's stadium will (almost assuredly) also be a steel superstructure, so it's cost will go up. At least NYCFC has deep pockets. That other proposal is gonna have to find additional private financing, and it's luxury apartments will likely go up in price - or the number of affordable apartments will go down.

Fortunately not, the major cost of that platform is not the physical steel that it will require but paying the variable costs to put that steel into the shape of a platform. The physical cost of the steel is probably something like 30% of the final cost of construction. So its really more like $77.5mm to build. (10% tariff)

 

[mgarbowski]

The politicians could completely eliminate the subsidy issue by selling the land subject solely to basic zoning regs and without an RFP. Then just accept the highest bid. But politicians are by their nature corrupt, vainglorious, and busy-bodies. They issue an RFP subject to 17 bullet point factors and requiring mixed use proposals with subsidized housing, and a very special balance of retail, medical, commercial , entertainment and residential elements. It is complicated and obtuse enough for the very purpose that they can use the flexibility to deliver the contract based on bribes, maximum press conferences, and/or just to their cronies.

 

[The Toe]

Certain parks allow BBQ and even have units set up. Prospect park is one. Brooklyn Bridge Park is another. I believe Van Cortland is a third. Booze is a totally different story, although every outdoor parks concert I’ve been to, whether rock or opera or whatever, there’s been a massive amount of alcohol consumed in plastic cups and there’s no way the parks Dept doesn’t know this. Also, regarding he BBQ, Randall’s Island has the luxury of having the FDNY training facility there, so any fires that get out of hand are covered by the pros.

Pelham Bay Park also has the BBQs and a ton of park space dedicated to it.

 

[sammy3469]

I've been thinking about this part. What interesting stuff would we look for if we could compare the full L+M proposal to NYCFC's?

Related question for anyone like Sabo and sammy3469 who knows a thing or two about these processes: What specific docs might we be able to track down from ESD at this stage besides the RFEI proposals?

I don't claim to know anything about these process, but these are all sort of basic questions when comparing investment proposals. That being said, at a minimum, I'd want to know:

• Their proposed lease payment to the state
• How many affordable housing units (the story didn't say)
• How they anticipate financing 2.2 billion dollars
• Do they anticipate having to move the intermodal terminal (NYCFC does)

That's a start.

 

[COLINMOUTH]

The park would want everything to do with NYCFC. As a whole, the NYC Park’s Dept has very little money for upkeep. The large, public parks like Central Park and Prospect Park have amazing upkeep because of private foundations set up for that purpose. Affluent neighborhoods may also have set up orgs to looks after their areas. But as a whole, the fringe parks get little. That’s why in the past there’s been a push by the city to have the rich orgs donate a percentage to the general fund. It’s not out of the realm of possibility for CFG to create a parks foundation to not only help Randall’s Island, but also the general fund of the forgotten parks. A mutually beneficial relationship.

Boom, guarantee this ends up happening. It just makes so much sense.

 

[The Toe]

This is from the L+M proposal:

Kyle Schnitzer‏@Kyle_Schnitzer
Other notes from Alexander Landing (ten buildings on site): Seven high-rises of mixed housing: 120K sq. ft of retail; 50K sq. ft Health Care facility operated by Montefiore Health System; 50K sq. ft for expanded Bronx Charter School for the Arts

Kyle Schnitzer‏@Kyle_Schnitzer
30K sq. ft of community/cultural space; 10K sq. ft for waterfront beer garden (Bronx Beer Hall); 200K sq. ft for two parking garages (585 total spaces)

Kyle Schnitzer‏@Kyle_Schnitzer
The seven high-rise residential towers will be a balanced mix of affordable, workforce, moderate income, market rate and supportive housing. No exact number of affordable housing in the Alexander Landing RFEI. However, a minimum of 50 supportive housing units will be made.

 

[LostAnvil]

fucking hell, trying to catch up in this thread is harder than finishing War and Peace

 

[Gotham Gator]

Worth noting, since it hasn't been said explicitly: if the site is going to include affordable housing, there needs to be some kind of price concession or subsidy from the state. In other words, to the extent the bid from NYCFC and its partners is below market or subsidized, it is reasonable to apportion some or all of that to the affordable housing piece.

 

[The Toe]

Is it possible that, through the leasing aspect, CFG would be willing to "wiggle" to sweeten the deal? The $500k figure has been thrown out a lot. If, for some reason, their proposal is losing its footing, could they amend it to, say, $1mil?

 

[Kjbert]

No matter what the details are behind it, the mere statement that no real estate taxes will be paid by the developers of the land (and the PILOTs have a poor track record of working out as planned) is enough to support the narrative that it's subsidized.

The rfp itself says the tenant will pay a fee in lieu of taxes to the State.

What more do you want on RENTED land?

 

[LionNYC]

Interview of the NY YIMBY writer that broke the NYCFC Harlem River Yards stadium story on NYCFC Nation (1:10:00 in)

http://thenycfcnation.com/2018/04/r...sbu-yimby-interview-about-harlem-river-yards/

 

[dummyrun]

Interview of the NY YIMBY writer that broke the NYCFC Harlem River Yards stadium story on NYCFC Nation (1:10:00 in)

http://thenycfcnation.com/2018/04/r...sbu-yimby-interview-about-harlem-river-yards/

Anybody getting anything useful out of this? The YIMBY guy sounds like me giving a fourth grade book report after skimming the jacket copy.

 

[FredMertz]

The rfp itself says the tenant will pay a fee in lieu of taxes to the State.

What more do you want on RENTED land?

PILOTs are a bullshit vehicle used by municipalities and developers to make the claim that taxes are effectively being paid. It's bullshit and there is no better example of that then Yankee Stadium.

Don't be a willing dupe!

 

[sundance]

Anybody getting anything useful out of this? The YIMBY guy sounds like me giving a fourth grade book report after skimming the jacket copy.

Agreed in re the YIMBY guy, but that in itself is useful. We got excited in part based on the implication (coming from an in-the-know RE blogger!) that this was pretty certain. But this interview pretty well shows that he doesn’t have any basis for his assumptions, other than the names of the parties involved. He just got the proposal and threw up the post.

 

[Ulrich]

Agreed in re the YIMBY guy, but that in itself is useful. We got excited in part based on the implication (coming from an in-the-know RE blogger!) that this was pretty certain. But this interview pretty well shows that he doesn’t have any basis for his assumptions, other than the names of the parties involved. He just got the proposal and threw up the post.

Did he name where he got the proposal and I missed it, or he’s holding that close to his vest?