« Weekend Events Open Thread »

August 28, 2009

ID'ing Troubled Condos

525-Clinton-Avenue-0809.jpg
Update: The assertion that the buildings in Assemblyman Jeffries' list are all struggling financially is incorrect. We based this assumption on the Crain's article, which stated that all the buildings in the list "are either financially troubled or on the verge of distress." Mr. Jeffries' list contains new, residential, market-rate buildings in his district. 377 Franklin, for example, was on the list, even though it is a rental and as of a year ago, seemed in good financial standing. Word comes from The Local that Crain's has corrected its error, and Lupe Todd, a spokesman for Jeffries, would not be more specific about the number of actually distressed buildings. He told The Local: "These buildings are coming in to the real estate market in a very distressed financial climate, which includes a recession, the bursting of the housing bubble, and the contraction on Wall St. As a result, Assemblyman Jeffries has concluded that it would be very difficult for many of the real estate developers and equity investors to obtain the financial returns they initially envisioned ... It would not be appropriate for the Assemblyman to elaborate on the financial condition of other buildings due to the sensitive nature of impending negotiations." The negotiations mentioned are Mr. Jeffries' talks with banks and developers about the possibility of unloading vacant units as affordable housing.

Yesterday Crain's reported that Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries has counted around 65 market-rate buildings in his district (District 57, which includes Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bedford-Stuyvesant, Crown Heights, and Prospect Heights) that are "financially troubled or on the verge of distress." The Local published the entire list of those developments, which includes both finished buildings and stalled projects. The list includes 30 buildings in Fort Greene and Clinton Hill, such as 525 Clinton (a.k.a. The Collection, a building with bad luck; you may remember that a worker died there last November). Mr. Jeffries says that he sees a silver lining in that some of these projects could be used for affordable housing, and he is approaching banks and developers to investigate this possibility (a possibility that reportedly at least one building in Downtown is already considering).
Update, 3 p.m.: The Local is now reporting that not all 65 developments on the list Jeffries' office put together are actually distressed properties, which makes a lot of sense. Apparently the list was simply of new residential buildings in the Assemblyman's district. More on this as it becomes clearer.
65 Central Bklyn Condos in or near Financial Distress [Crain's]
Gleaming Landscape of Debt [The Local, NYT]
Troubling Developments [The Local, NYT]
The Ghosts of 525 Clinton [Brownstoner]
Downtown Development Going Affordable [Brownstoner]




Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/11203

Comments

A GMAP of these would be really interesting to see.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 28, 2009 9:07 AM

They should get to it and stop wasting time. House people before winter rolls in.

Posted by: dittoburg at August 28, 2009 9:17 AM

what makes a building 'financially troubled'? is there some concrete metric?

Posted by: ltjbukem73 at August 28, 2009 9:31 AM

i'm curious about the definition of 'troubled' as well. the crain's article doesn't really specify and the list includes a whole lot of buildings in very different situations. for example, 1 hanson pl - recent price cuts, but a lot of sales - and - 95 lexington, 111 steuben, etc - with no closed sales, a lot of units still on the market, etc. some of these look like real candidates for loan defaults, others less so.

Posted by: perhaps at August 28, 2009 9:36 AM


Looks like the AY footprint will receive its affordable units after all.

Posted by: East New York at August 28, 2009 9:39 AM

correction - 95 lex does have closed units - but you get the point

Posted by: perhaps at August 28, 2009 9:42 AM

@DIBS and everyone else --

Andy Newman from The Local here. The GMAP suggestion is a good one. One of our commenters had the same thought. If there's an intrepid citizen journalist out there who has the time today (I don't, unfortunately) and the inclination to build such a map, that would be awesome. It could post here (if Mr. B wants it) and on The Local both. I'm happy to forward the whole spreadsheet, which includes data like the status of the building (complete, under construction, etc.), whether it’s condo or rental, etc. If interested, drop me a line at bklocal@nytimes.com. Thanks much.

Posted by: andynewman at August 28, 2009 10:14 AM

Never mind re GMAP. An intrepid Local reader has just volunteered! Will notify yall when it's up.

Posted by: andynewman at August 28, 2009 10:30 AM

"ID'ing Troubled Condos"

Piece o' cake: All.

"what makes a building 'financially troubled'? is there some concrete metric?"

Less than fitty cent (sometimes higher) sold.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 28, 2009 10:45 AM

Trouble ID'ing troubled condos? Where's Forte' aka Forente'? Just put a blanket on all of 'em. Some developers we're able to dump but resellers are not. No GMAP necessary, we have streeteasy and the Times.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 28, 2009 10:55 AM

VICTORY

Posted by: brickoven at August 28, 2009 11:12 AM

I keep wondering about what's going to happen to that Collection building. Is it even still listed?

Posted by: Heather at August 28, 2009 11:14 AM

anybody know the history of Harlem?

Posted by: brickoven at August 28, 2009 11:34 AM

PS. If you want more info on Hakeem Jeffries or the district he represents, check out:

http://www.gothamgazette.com/albany/district/assembly57

Posted by: serpentor at August 28, 2009 11:54 AM

mashup:

http://bit.ly/3qNVHB

Posted by: ltjbukem73 at August 28, 2009 12:45 PM

nice ltjbukem73!

it's interesting that there is a 'troubled condo corridor' that seems to run between vanderbilt and bedford from the navy yard all the way through prospect heights.

on first glance it seems to mirror just those 'emerging' areas that developers really sunk their teeth into - on the eastern border of clinton hill and prospect heights/western border of bed-stuy and crown heights

Posted by: perhaps at August 28, 2009 1:01 PM

This map defines what I said was fringe Brooklyn. You guys should also check out a map of delinquint mortgages in brooklyn.

Posted by: brickoven at August 28, 2009 1:16 PM

Hi, Andy from the Local again. Hold everything. Disregard our list. Disregard Crain's article. Crain's article (and therefore ours and therefore Brownstoner's) is totally wrong. Jeffries' camp now says it's simply a list of buildings in his district. Some of them undoubtedly are distressed. But we don't know which. And Jeffries says he never said they all were. Sorry for the agita this has caused.

Posted by: andynewman at August 28, 2009 2:29 PM

"Some of them undoubtedly are distressed. But we don't know which."

I do. All. Who cares whether its the developers and/or individuals? Condos will take a bath.

Damage control, andy?

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 28, 2009 2:52 PM

Damage control? It is considered customary and responsible practice in the journalism business, when one publishes an error, e.g., stating flat-out that Jeffries says all those building are troubled/distressed, to correct said error. You will find Crain's doing the same shortly, if they haven't already.

Posted by: andynewman at August 28, 2009 3:00 PM

andy if what you are saying is true the developers will sue the jeffries guy. Is this guy that dumb ?

Posted by: brickoven at August 28, 2009 3:16 PM

brickoven, BHO et al: Our just-posted update here lays it out:

http://fort-greene.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/a-gleaming-landscape-of-debt/

Posted by: andynewman at August 28, 2009 6:12 PM

I don't know what qualifications Hakeem Jeffries has for determining which projects are "distressed". Judging by his name, there is some Islam in his heritage, which might suggest that to him, any property paying interest on a loan (usury?) is in distress. To me this announcement is beyond contemptible. He is a state official, therefore, his pronouncements may become self fulfilling prophesies. Great!! He can now get the city to pick them up at fire sale prices and fill them with public housing tenants. I have no objection to public housing tenants, but a lot of market rate customers seem to equate them with a slide into the abyss. Personally, my experience is that if public housing tenants represent ~10% of a particular building/neighborhood's population, there is no problem, especially if their housing is indistinguishable from their neighbors.

I live in one of the building Jeffries has identified. I can't imagine he has better information than me, so how does he determine my building is in distress? As far as I am aware, none of the owners, nor the sponsor is delinquent in maintenance, so we're okay.

I'm sorry but I suspect all NY politicians of ulterior motives. I think that Jeffries wants to convert a lot of these buildings to public housing on the cheap. Ny politicians pander to their basest electorate.

New York State has the best politicians money can buy.

Posted by: bohuma at August 28, 2009 9:57 PM

lovely. a list assembled by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about and then reported on by publications who don't know what they're talking about. the shmucks leading the shmucks.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at August 29, 2009 9:40 AM

i'd love to see these developers get together and sue this a-hole mouthpiece for a littany of torts that come to mind. this guy is a f-ing s-head.

Posted by: BrooklynLove at August 29, 2009 9:42 AM

here's the gmaps mashup

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=107314948711201979790.000472351289ddef7c12e&z=13

Posted by: ltjbukem73 at August 29, 2009 11:18 AM

@bohuma -- [Sigh] Not knowing anything about Jeffries' background, Bohuma, note that many people have names with "Islam heritage" origins but their families' religions are far from Islam. Parents may have liked the sound or meaning of the name. Don't start stirring the pot while looking for the meat; it could just be clear broth.

Posted by: FiredUpReadyToGo at August 29, 2009 11:24 AM

"Judging by his name, there is some Islam in his heritage, which might suggest that to him, any property paying interest on a loan (usury?) is in distress."

Resorting to islamophobic and racist statements will not stop this inevitable collapse nor will it stop your building from falling in to distress if it already hasn't (it didn't stop Obama from being elected).

"self-fullfilling prophesies" can make things no worse than they already are. The only qualification one needs to determine what's distressed is basic math.

Mr. Jeffries' motive is not ulterior. It's in your face. It's part of his mission. This list is merely a means to an end.

A born and bred Brooklynite is taking back his borough. What have you done for all the hardworking Brooklyn residents priced out because of some giant home price Ponzi scheme? Don't answer. I already know.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 30, 2009 2:23 AM

BHO, you are my hero! (and so is Mr. Jeffries who just won my vote.)

Posted by: qis4quincy at August 30, 2009 11:36 AM

I agree, BHO! I don't usually allow myself to wade into these waters but, on this one, I gotta say: your observation is on the money! (Yes, pun intended) :-)

Posted by: Brooklynista at August 30, 2009 7:43 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions