« Looking at ACORN's testimony before the ESDC: boilerplate support without any acknowledgment of doubt | Main | Group can $core on Atl. Yards »

September 21, 2009

Why did Ratner say AY could take 25 years? Because that's what the ESDC gives him (despite official claims of a decade)

Atlantic Yards Report

"It would be less complicated if the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) and Atlantic Yards supporters simply" told the truth, but that ain't happening, so project critics have to slog through official documents just to piece together the lies.

It would be less complicated if the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) and Atlantic Yards supporters simply professed that Atlantic Yards would have a ten-year timetable in official documents while acknowledging in public statements that the project could take much longer (as project opponent Daniel Goldstein pointed out in comments at the ESDC board meeting last Thursday).

Actually, the ESDC's been speaking out of both sides of its mouth in official documents. According to the 2009 Modified General Project Plan MGPP), issued in June:

The build-out of the Project is likely to occur in two phases, with the Project elements on the Phase I Site and the Upgraded Yard (collectively, "Phase I") anticipated to be completed by 2014 and the Project elements on the Phase II Site (collectively, "Phase II") anticipated to be completed by 2019.
(Emphases added)

However, as Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn has pointed out, the revised deal for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Vanderbilt Yard gives the FCR 22 years, until 2030, to pay for the railyard, and only after payment would the six development parcels be conveyed to the developer.

In other words, the only way to meet the ten-year timetable would be for Forest City Ratner to speed up payments.

Why all the fuss about the how long the project takes to build?

Does the ESDC think the ten-year period likely? It didn't say so. Indeed, the evidence from the MTA and the ESDC's own leases indicates that the timetable is unlikely and nearly impossible.

And that means that the claimed project benefits would come much more slowly, and that claimed blight would persist rather than be removed.

article

Posted by lumi at September 21, 2009 6:12 AM