It's about air-rights. And, from Stringer's perspective, perhaps something that can separate him from de Blasio in a forthcoming mayoral match-up.
http://observer.com/2015/10/leading-elected-officials-question-development-rights-in-stuy-town-deal/
Asking out of complete lack of knowledge on air rights. Is that the space above our PCVST buildings that they want to build apartments on?
ReplyDeleteBlackstone has said it will not build on the buildings here. The air-rights, which apparently they will get, would be sold to an entity or entities outside of STPCV, probably a distance away where Blackstone could get more money for them.
ReplyDeleteOh, so air rights on other buildings Blackstone owns that are not in PCVST, is that right?
ReplyDeleteBecause the number of sq ft is very specific, indicating there are plans in the works and architects on the clock.
So is it other NYC buildings outside of this neighborhood?
Blackstone has a right to sell STPCV air-rights to someone outside of STPCV. I'm sure that the USE of those air-rights to build something high would have to get zoning approval. Not sure, but I assume Blackstone could also parcel sell those rights, instead of just selling everything to one entity. Some good money to be made.
ReplyDeleteEven the air is not for free anymore. There is no way they are going to build on top of old buildings that are already 65 years old. They'll crumble! But, maybe that will finally get rid of all these students.
ReplyDeleteIt is a strange number. A precise number. And whoever they pretend to sell it to - because as we all know they all sell to each other in incestuous REBNY trades -
ReplyDeleteAre they building above the Oval? So there would be "open space" above an elevate building - kind of a walk through above ground tunnel.
You sure about that? It is kind of fuzzy and Blackstone just bought 25 apartment buildings / in Chelsea and Upper East Side / two neighborhoods Hoylman and Stringer care deeply about, more deeply than Stuyvesant Town Peter Cooper Village. Are you sure it isn't a deal allowing Blackstone to sell air rights on their other 25 properties?
ReplyDeletePost this comment or keep it private - but could you give me your expertise on this as I can't understand it for the life of me.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-22/blackstone-venture-said-to-buy-25-nyc-apartment-buildings
Are they selling our air rights to Kushner in his below 14th projects?
ReplyDeleteIs that why they want Associated to leave?
ReplyDeleteYes and as we all know landlords always keep there promise.
ReplyDelete“The Wall Street Journal reported that Blackstone could reap $350 million on 700,000 square feet of as-of-right space—but the missive to Blackstone notes that documents from the deal indicate the site in fact has 10.7 million square feet of air rights it could potentially sell”
ReplyDeleteI’m confused.
10.7 million sq ft exceeds by more than 15x the amount (700,000 sq ft worth $350 million) cited by WSJ when Mayor de Blasio’s historic affordable housing deal with Blackstone was announced. Who would give WSJ such wrong lowballed amounts? Why?
Selling 10.7 million sq ft unused PCVST development rights could reap Blackstone a $5.35 billion dollar windfall, exceeding by $500 million the $5.3 billion subsidized purchase price Blackstone will pay for the existing PCVST development.
Does that mean
Mayor de Blasio effectively gave PCVST to Blackstone for free?
Plus an additional $500 million unused development rights?
Plus $225 million NYC tax subsidies?
Plus Fannie/Freddie purchase funding?
Plus what else?
Is it possible unused PCVST development rights are worth more than the entire 80-acre PCVST development?
Who could have ever known that?
Mayor de Blasio?
Blackstone?
At least my PCVST rent is affordable a few more years.
Thank you for that Mayor de Blasio.
They can't build on the buildings here because the structures would not take it. These buildings are made of cinder block with a red brick facade. They were built on the cheap immediately after WWII, which is why we have crappy plumbing (shortage of copper) and why the floors are not "floated", i.e., there is not cushioning between the floor of one apartment and the ceiling of the one below it. They didn't have sufficient materials to do that.
ReplyDeleteOf course, we all know that the DOB and our glad-handing pols would build on a sinkhole if they could profit from it, but I doubt they will take a chance in this case.
What? Why didn't they just ask Dan for the details? Hoylman said in his press release to ask Dan for any further details or questions. Or why don't they ask the Mayor? I thought they all worked on this together and closely.
ReplyDeleteI don't get it. As opposed to selling air rights to someone "within" PCVST?
ReplyDeleteWhen one sells air rights isn't it always to someone outside?
Or is that there way of getting around Blackstone agreeing not to develop on the land - by having "another" developer do the actual building here. Even though we know they are all in it together.
I can see why it is confusing and needs clarification, but these three, Hoylman, Maloney, and Stringer wanting the clarification is more weirdly confusing than the "air-rights contract term"
These three aren't that interested in the people here unless it is election time.
I think de Blasio is trying to do as good as he can for PCVST but not Dan. Something is hincky.
Read Stringer's letter, co-signed by Maloney, Hoylman, Kavanaugh. They are questioning the right to sell air rights outside the immediate neighborhood. EV Gtieve is covering this today as well. Thanks STR.
ReplyDeleteAnother NYC air rights issue. We really are a "one company town" and that company is REBNY.
ReplyDelete"Last week the City announced an agreement with a developer and the Hudson River Park Trust for a massive rezoning plan for the 3-block St. John’s Terminal site (bounded by West, Clarkson, and Washington Streets, extending two blocks south of Houston Street). Under the plan, five towers would be constructed on the site, ranging from 430 to 240 feet in height, and include residential uses, commercial (hotel and/ or offices), a large amount of retail space, and some public open space. Currently the developer can build about 1 million square feet of space on the site with no height limit, limited to commercial uses (office, hotel, retail). Under the plan, much more lucrative residential uses would be allowed, and the size of allowable development would increase by about 70%, or 810,000 square feet. As part of the plan, $100 million would be paid for 200,000 square feet of “air rights” from Pier 40, which would go towards repairing the public pier, and 25% of the residential space/30% of the residential units (approx. 325,000 sq. ft.) would be reserved for affordable housing."
http://www.gvshp.org/_gvshp/preservation/hudson/hudson-10-27-15.htm
Traveling and just read through every paper, every article and the town meeting.
ReplyDeleteHOlY fuck, COULD THE MARKET RATE tenants be fucked any more royally. Why, why do they hate us. Not even the so called lottery gives a current (almost a decade here) nice family man preference? wow, just wow. you all suck.
At the meeting, local pols indicated that this sale of ST-PCV's air-rights is a huge sticking point in this deal and that a host of city agencies, Community Boards, and city councilpeople will be involved. My understanding is that the deal's closing date is in Dec, so all will have to move quickly to resolve this.
ReplyDeleteSTR
ReplyDeleteI believe it was said at the meeting that zoning approval is also needed. The liked-to article affirms that. Not much time to solve this before the deal closing as I said.
" Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThey can't build on the buildings here because the structures would not take it. These buildings are made of cinder block with a red brick facade. They were built on the cheap immediately after WWII, which is why we have crappy plumbing (shortage of copper) and why the floors are not "floated", i.e., there is not cushioning between the floor of one apartment and the ceiling of the one below it. They didn't have sufficient materials to do that.
Of course, we all know that the DOB and our glad-handing pols would build on a sinkhole if they could profit from it, but I doubt they will take a chance in this case.
October 27, 2015 at 5:19 PM"
Are you serious ?? The buildings are constructed of steel girders with concrete floors and walls and a brick skin. The only cinder block I've ever seen was when they reconstructed the elevator bank walls to install the automatic doors, and in other construction post 1990. You'd know that if you watched the top of 21 Oval blow across the street when that asshole stuck his head in the oven on the 10th floor. Not that they would ever bother, but they could put 10 more floors on these suckers and they wouldn't even sway in the breeze.
Timing says it all
ReplyDeletehttp://nypost.com/2015/10/26/de-blasio-will-finally-endorse-hillary-clinton-source/
Why is the Steinberg Doyle Tenant Association always promoting the Barclays Center?
ReplyDeleteWith Mulrow and Cuomo running New Yorker's housing authorities and courts PCVST'ers don't stand a chance to fight to protect their homes. Gov Litwin is all over the press lately with his interference with ethics committees, bank regulators, just as with the Moreland Commission. He is rigging the system, fixing ethics commissions, housing authorities, and courts.
ReplyDeleteGovernor Litwin has no interest or ability to be a "Governor of the People". He believes his is "CEO of New York" and his job is to make New York profitable- instead of making New Yorker's profitable.
That is why communities are being devastated while his wealthy friends are prospering. He treats citizens like we are his employees and his wealthy friends are his shareholders. Every which way Gov Litwin can take from us to give to his friends he finds and exploits to the nth degree.
Gov Litwin you are supposed to invest in your citizens, not live off of them.
The incumbents put profits over people. Their end game is to devastate this once healthy, thriving community of 30,000 People to replace it with profit making buildings for the wealthy friends of the incumbents to play at their golf courses, horse tracks and casinos.
Their job was not to make a deal finding a compromise between a thriving community and global conglomerates. Their job was to stand firm to keep the community of 30,000 healthy, thriving. Dan, Marsh, Doyle, Steinberg wiped out the first 6000 apartments of over half the population. The remaining are being bled dry, more slowly, but still bled dry.
This governor is killing the communities, he is not made of CEO caliber, we are not his employees.
OK
ReplyDeleteHere is the letter on "transferring" PCVST air rights. Essentially the politicians see that Blackstone has been given potentially up to 10.7 million square feet of air rights anywhere in NYC as the boundaries of immediate vicinity apparently is not defined in the deal. So it could be argued that anywhere in Manhattan is immediate vicinity.
http://citylimits.org/2015/10/27/nyc-officials-quiz-stuy-town-buyer-on-air-rights/
The concern is not for development of air rights in PCVST and possibly not even the East Village as their letter points out there are no available parcels. The first paragraph is delusional, and the argument of using their failure to make this once healthy iconic community a landmark as the reason air rights cannot be transferred to whatever neighborhoods they are protecting from what they would readily do to us is a bit injury to insult. On top of another injury, they are insisting the deal be shared with the public for the sake of the other neighborhoods they are arguing for, while they are fine with a deal not being shared with this community that directly effects us.
But here it is. The letter of hypocrisy:
Here is the letter in 2 parts to fit the blog format - part 1
ReplyDeleteOctober 26, 2015
John Gray Global Head of Real Estate Blackstone
345 Park Avenue, 42nd Fl.
New York, NY 10154
Re: Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village Air Rights
Dear Mr. Gray: Thank you for sharing information with our offices about your proposed purchase of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village (ST/PCV). For over half a century, ST/PCV has served as a bulwark of stable, middle-class affordable housing in Manhattan. That’s why we have long stood with our partners in government and the extraordinary ST/PCV tenants association to protect the complex. As elected officials, it’s our job to build strong, sustainable neighborhoods and protect the long-term economic health of the City. Preserving affordable housing and maintaining open space, at ST/PCV and elsewhere, are critical components of that civic mission.
The deal outlined earlier this week is a positive step toward preserving affordable housing at ST/PCV and we are glad that Blackstone has made a firm public commitment not to build on any of the open space in the complex. However, we must express our concern regarding your intention to pursue transferring air rights from ST/PCV to the surrounding communities. This component of the agreement has not been disclosed in any detailed way either in the public documents or in our conversations about the deal.
New York’s communities are keenly aware of the potential impacts associated with air rights, and any plan to radically change the zoning of a large parcel of land must include the community’s voice. ST/PCV tenants, the local community board, and the surrounding neighborhoods need and deserve a detailed description of Blackstone’s intentions including the scale, timeline and public purpose of the zoning change.
Air rights are not a commodity that can be transferred across the city at will; they are zoned onto individual properties pursuant to a larger neighborhood plan and only after full consideration of the potential impacts. The transfer of air rights from one block to another has only been permitted in connection with a clear public purpose and only when limited to the immediate vicinity of the site in question. In the Theatre and East Midtown Special Districts, for example, the transfer of air rights is permitted to preserve landmark buildings. In the Highline Special District, the transfer of air rights is permitted to move density away from the Highline and improve light and air for this public amenity.
ReplyDeletepart 2
While ST/PCV is an iconic community endowed with substantial open space, the two superblocks that make up the complex include neither landmarks nor public parks. Further, the neighborhoods immediately surrounding the superblocks have few vacant parcels to accommodate any new density. Therefore, the public purpose of your proposal, and the boundaries within which an air rights transfer can occur, are not readily apparent.
The public reporting has indicated that only 700,000 square feet of air rights are available on the site. However, the October 2015 term sheet applies no restriction on the total density that can be transferred, and Department of City Planning data indicates that the unused air rights on the two superblocks could amount to 10.7 million square feet when community facility uses are included. While we recognize that no official number has yet to be set, the potential impacts of 10.7 million square feet of density on public transit, streets or other critical infrastructure are staggering, and the true number must be clarified and publicly disclosed.
Finally, while we appreciate that no formal agreement has been submitted, a change of this potential magnitude deserves immediate public disclosure and discussion. It is essential that these conversations begin prior to finalizing an agreement to ensure time for community consultation. To begin the discussion, we believe it is appropriate to address the following questions:
•
What is the scale of density of air rights that Blackstone is intending to transfer?
•
What is Blackstone’s intended timeline for public discussions, disclosures, and feedback?
•
What is Blackstone’s view of the intended public purpose of this potential rezoning?
•
Does Blackstone intend to concentrate the new density on one site or multiple sites?
•
What geographical constraints is Blackstone considering for receiving sites of the density?
•
How does Blackstone interpret the clause in the term sheet that the company will enjoy the “support” of New York City in its “efforts to transfer unused development rights?” We request that you meet with our offices to discuss your proposal and plans for public outreach. The details of this agreement must be shared with the community openly and in full, not through partial explanations that raise as many questions as answers.
Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter, and we look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely, Scott M. Stringer Carolyn B. Maloney New York City Comptroller Member of Congress Brad Hoylman Brian Kavanagh New York State Senator New York State Assemblymember
If they transfer the air rights, that could be very very good for PCVST.
ReplyDeleteThat would mean they cannot bulldoze our homes and develop here. That would mean wherever they transfer the air rights, the homes in those buildings are still safe, and the developer can build above existing buildings.
Transferring the air rights keeps homes safe here and wherever air rights are transferred, so in that aspect it seems a good thing.
The letter alludes to blocking views - not demolishing homes. It would seem the right priority to protect a home at the expense of protecting a view.
If the issue of the air rights use is blocking sunlight, that is all together different, as then it becomes a health issue - sunlight contributes to vitamin intake (D), effects psychological health, clean air, oxygenating air by our lifeline trees and plant life, etc.
How much do you want to bet that closely after the Blackstone deal is done, De Blasio endorses Clinton?
ReplyDeleteLOL
ReplyDeleteDOB did build on a sinkhole in their greed for profit. The bunker is built on a sinkhole! They built it over the 1940's 17th street buildings. Under the bunker and playground is an old school house from 1940.
"Asking out of complete lack of knowledge on air rights."
ReplyDelete"Oh, so air rights on other buildings Blackstone owns that are not in PCVST, is that right?"
"Are you sure it isn't a deal allowing Blackstone to sell air rights on their other 25 properties?"
"Are they selling our air rights to Kushner in his below 14th projects?"
"Is it possible unused PCVST development rights are worth more than the entire 80-acre PCVST development?"
"When one sells air rights isn't it always to someone outside?"
All the above comments are a testament to how well our elected representatives, Garodnick-TA for 4 years and de Blasio-Glen for 2 years, successfully kept PCVST tenants ignorant and uninformed about the underlying value of PCVST development rights that could be sold to quickly reduce purchase debt and financially stabilize a PCVST complex owned by residents.
This transaction was about NY politicians delivering multiple windfalls to REBNY/Wall Street without their PCVST resident constituents knowing about the windfalls until reported in news media as a fait accompli.
I don't for one second believe these four politicians are fighting to protect the Stuyvesant Town Peter Cooper Village community and East Village neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteThese four fight for the money neighborhoods - the new money tech in Chelsea and the old money crust in the Upper East Side.
We have seen this game trade before.
Remember when Hoylman fought for the moneyed who summer in Fire Island to block Verizon and won thanks to AG Schneiderman helping Hoylman block Verizon in Fire Island; all while Hoylman helped with installing it in Stuyvesant Town Peter Cooper Village, ripping out our entire Oval Tree Park and offering his Senate office services to Verizon for customer retention to keep the number of Stuyvesant Town Peter Cooper Village customer base for Verizon?
Seems like Hoylman's game is to trade our community / property to save his favored communities / neighborhoods.
Posted on EV Grieve:
ReplyDeletehttp://evgrieve.com/2015/10/local-politicos-seek-answers-on-stuy.html?showComment=1445976419633#c5035902559083371089
Per Vanity Fair...Love him or hate him, the smart money in New York City says that de Blasio is virtually ensured a second term. “What Manhattanites in the ‘Bloomberg Bubble’ don’t understand,” says the organization head who deals regularly with the mayor’s office, “is that many people in the outer boroughs love him as much as Manhattanites hate him. But even more important is that the city’s builders love him, and they have always elected the mayor in New York City, by funneling more money than anyone else to their chosen candidate. Why do they love de Blasio? Because he doesn’t give a damn about urban planning, density, or architecture. He only cares about more affordable housing. For the builders that means they get to build an extra 20 floors and do it with fewer restrictions.”
October 27, 2015 at 4:06 PM
Mr Gray gave a speech early Summer about his take on the housing crisis being a "shortage of apartments in NYC" he was going to fix by building more apartments; which makes me just about fall off my chair laughing.
ReplyDeleteThere are too many people-less luxury apartments sitting empty and too many people without apartments and too many people getting kicked out of apartments to make way for people-less luxury empty apartments.
The problem in New York City is not that there aren't enough apartments. Its that the apartments being built are all wrong in every which way Mr Gray.
"Hey Blackstone! Before you come build higher with more density in my territory, you got to ask my permission and pay tribute to me first!"
ReplyDeleteStringer, Maloney, Hoylman and Kavanagh consider PCVST history. It's done. They will not take Mayor de Blasio's affordable housing "victory" away from him, even offering backhanded praise calling his awful PCVST deal with Blackstone a "positive step." This letter is a thinly veiled threat informing Blackstone they can throw monkey wrenches into the transaction disrupting or delaying a final sale.
What they now want is a piece of the action, previously undisclosed windfall profits Blackstone will gain exploiting PCVST development rights. They knew it was coming, but they had to keep quiet waiting for it. Now we'll be treated to a standard NYC political dog and pony show. Our elected representatives will take familiar pose and posture theatrics defending their local communities against rampant construction and gentrification, demanding tiny parks, trivial amenities, public access bathrooms, etc. A humble Blackstone will comply, but as usual the promised public benefits will never exist or very quickly disappear.
Oval Pool&Spa baby. Just wait! And now, the end is near................
ReplyDeleteI BET you they plan to knock these buildings down, one by one, relocate us, and rebuild. Remember, they did say they are in it for the LONG haul. I do not expect them to be a Met Life landlord, and just collect rent. I think something major is up their sleeves.
ReplyDeleteWe are not buying their act. Voting against each one! Don't care who the opponent is they get the vote.
ReplyDeleteI BET you they knock down and don't relocate us.
ReplyDeleteget prepared, the worst will be far worse than we can imagine.
They have to, it's by law.
ReplyDeleteMidtown East?
ReplyDeleteget prepared, the worst will be far worse than we can imagine.
ReplyDeleteWhat?
The buildings are sturdy, and used to be almost fireproof before they replaced safe metal interior doors with decorative fire hazard interior doors.
ReplyDeleteBut foundations and bones are designed for current height, depth and width of the buildings. Putting ten more stories on top requires serious foundation and bone work.
Foundation work requires digging up bad stuff buried beneath.
Plus on the bunker, DOB, Compass Rock, Dan / TA Marsh Steinberg Doyle board used college kids to survey what is beneath which is why they were all shocked to discover underneath the First Avenue Loop buildings (now bunker) is hollow.
They brought in a mounted truck drill to survey for bedrock and missed a huge gaping hollow hole in their survey! Steingberg announced (lied) no jackhammering because no bedrock found during the 2013 below surface surveying (with no mention of the hollow hole, old school house, huge cruddy sanitation waste pipe,) -- a big deep hole of the old 17th street and buried asbestos-petroleum and now-banned-chemical buildings from the late 1800's - early 1900's.
Serious incompetence.
Then there was a lot of jackhammering early in the morning, all day and late into the night, and one brave tenant successfully got a 30% rent abatement for the noise despite no support and even resistance from the TA board on everything to do with the construction. I heard they tried to give tenants a $200 dinner coupon which I am sure had Fred Knapps strings attached in tiny print that if you redeemed the coupon you cannot sue for any sickness caused.
All around negligence.
STR you and the songwriter commentator and everyone might enjoy this
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeE3-rOG7i4&feature=youtu.be
by law: what law - This corporation does nothing lawful.
ReplyDeletePretty funny how we all have become engineers and lawyers all of a sudden.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteOctober 29, 2015 at 7:59 AM
by law: what law?
Here is your answer:
From RGB:
My landlord is demolishing my building - what are my rights?
Here are two scenarios:
1. City Requires Demolition:
If this is the case you will have to move. Before demolition, the City will issue a vacate order. Instructions will be included on the order indicating which agency to contact for questions. If you have any questions about your continuing rights following the vacate order, we suggest you get legal advice, which can be obtained by visiting our Legal Services webpage. You also may have rights to relocate back in the building, if it is to be repaired or rebuilt.
2. Owner is seeking demolition to rebuild:
The law does not allow an owner of a rent regulated building to simply demolish the building and throw the tenants out. The owner must follow the steps mandated by the NY State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, the state agency that administers the rent laws. These steps include notification procedures and relocation assistance. See the first question in this section for further information.
I have never voted for Garodnick, Cuomo, Stringer and never will. However, I did NOT vote for Bloomberg either. They are all criminals.
ReplyDeleteOctober 29, 2015 at 8:56 AM
ReplyDeletePerhaps, but Blackstone runs the NY State Division of Housing and Community Renewal and Alicia Glen is paving the way for landlords to relocate tenants where the landlord wants to redecorate, er I mean renovate, er I mean rebuild. Oh hell, whatever the landlord wants to do Cuomo Mullrow will pave the way.
Relatively new tenants having a big issue with the porter in our building - is there a property office manager to contact to discuss anyone?
ReplyDeleteLater for that. Call the cops. You will get MORE of a response.
ReplyDeleteHow lovely that BS owns the DHCR - no wonder they don't reply to the overcharges. LoLLLLLLLLLL
ReplyDeleteA lot of people are getting paid under the table.
ReplyDelete