ID'ing Troubled Condos
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…
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]
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) 🙂
BHO, you are my hero! (and so is Mr. Jeffries who just won my vote.)
“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***
@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.
here’s the gmaps mashup
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=107314948711201979790.000472351289ddef7c12e&z=13
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.
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.
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.
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/