City Spends Almost $40 Million on Two Downtown Lots
The action keeps getting hotter in Downtown Brooklyn. In recent days we’ve reported several significant transactions between United Land and Avalon Bay on the block bounded by Bridge, Willoughby and Duffield. Now comes news of two mega-deals one block east between Duffield and Albee Square. At the end of December, the City of New York…
The action keeps getting hotter in Downtown Brooklyn. In recent days we’ve reported several significant transactions between United Land and Avalon Bay on the block bounded by Bridge, Willoughby and Duffield. Now comes news of two mega-deals one block east between Duffield and Albee Square. At the end of December, the City of New York paid $23,500,000 to buy 213 Duffield Street, a 16,500-square-foot lot with about 200,000 square feet of buildable floor area; in a separate transaction, the city also dropped $15,000,000 for a contiguous 8,746-square-foot lot at 408 Albee Square with about 100,000 square feet of air rights. All told: $38,500,000 for 300,000 buildable square feet. Anyone know what the city has up its sleeve? Update: As per the first commenter, this does look like where the city is planning to create Willoughby Square Park; there is, we believe, also supposed to be a parking garage underneath the park. Thanks, Zinka.
408 Albee Square [Property Shark] GMAP
213 Duffield Street [Property Shark] GMAP
Correction: Joe Chan, who thinks that people who drive are the only ones who count.
Yes, Mgm, this is a leftover from the Bob Moses era, specifically Downtown Brooklyn Partnership President Joe Chan, who thinks that people who drive don’t count.
http://capntransit.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-chan-is-at-it-again.html
Knick’, a municipality is sometimes an interim owner in urban renewal schemes. For an example, think of any now privately-owned residential development on a super-block. The municipality takes control of the site, then sells or gives it to a developer.
I can’t say I know what property in downtown Brooklyn sells for per developable square foot. But here’s an interesting twist to your argument that the city over-paid: how do all the hold-outs not get the same price in court now that the city has established comparable value in a purportedly arms-length deal?
Peter18:
I’m well aware of the negotiation process involved with eminent domain. I am commenting that the application of that policy is inconsistent given the high prices paid these Albee Square parcels.
I think the city would have gotten a significantly better deal in court. Since “Cost of litigation” is not an issue (please read my first post in this section) I am guessing that this was a sweetheart deal because of connections and political contributions made by Laramie Dawson.
While the days of abusing the “blight” tag are done, this property was not special (mostly parking lots) so this could have been an opportunity to save the taxpayers ten million (or more). Unlike Rater, this is 100% public use – why not get the best deal for the people. Isn’t that the whole idea of eminent domain?
Given that the city is closings schools and fire stations, this whole situation fails the “smell test” in my opinion.
A plan to attract more drivers to downtown Brooklyn. Is this a leftover from the Moses era?
Knick,
Even when eminent domain is invoked the government still has to pay for the property it takes. Governments almost always try to negotiate a settlement before invoking eminent domain. That’s what happened with everyone who was amenable in the Atlantic Yards project footprint. Eminent domain was only required for those who wouldn’t sell.
g man:
I appreciate your comments, but how is this not going to be city property? The city is now the current owner.
Also, the sale value of the land was about $128/ft for a teardown (38.5M / 300,000 sq ft). The fair market value of that land is way below that value. We pay for corporate counsel attorneys regardless of the amount of work they perform. I believe any judge would have given a price that was 1/2 that amount.
The only thing I see here is a one-sided deal for a real estate developer, but nothing about this is truly benefiting the taxpayers.
Knick’, I believe these are negotiated sales. Owners in the Willoughby Square footprint that are not able to agree to a sales price with the city will have their property taken by eminent domain. Those owners can then go to court and haggle over the appraised value.
If I remember correctly, 213 Duffield used to house a city agency of some sort; HRA? Reaching a settlement with a party that the city has done business with in the past might have been an easier (or something) process than the other negotiations.
Also, Willoughby Square will not be a “park,” at least not in the sense of owned by the city. It will be more like the Metrotech Commons.
Keep digging. Keep watching.