Was the unanimous 7-0 New Rochelle City Council vote on the Forest City Residential proposal for Echo Bay a Hail Mary pass? While development in New Rochelle is not a football game, only the next nine months will tell whether all the needed information can be assembled. Forest City Residential’s new MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) was reduced from the originally proposed 18 months to nine months. During this time the City will receive environmental and financial analysis from the developer, but possibly not the Final Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS). In the next month the City will request proposals for adaptive reuse of the Armory.
In the original plan the Echo Bay site consisted of approximately 18 to 20 acres with 700 residential units and 100,000 square feet of retail and commercial. This was reduced to the approximately nine acres of the present Public Works Yard. Only 200-300 apartments and 25,000 to 50,000 square feet of retail and commercial are now proposed At this time a change already made in the new proposal was an additional deck for parking to accommodate the retail projected.
Before the Council voted on April 17, 2012, Councilman Lou Trangucci stated he felt reducing the time frame of the MOU from the original 18 months to nine months would give everyone the opportunity to know the costs of moving the City Yard, developing the Armory and the Echo Bay proposal at one time. Councilman Al Tarantino agreed and felt it would determine where the City is going, especially regarding the City Yard. He felt the nine month time frame worked well. Councilman Jared Rice asked about local hiring and Abe Naparstek claimed Forest City Residential would hire locally but also asked for a definition of local – was it State, New Rochelle or County? Councilman Ivar Hyden was concerned about the RFP (Request for Proposals) for the entire Armory. Councilwoman Shari Rackman clarified that there were two proposals: one which included the Annex of the Armory, and another without the Annex in the Forest City Residential proposal. Naparstek clarified that in the “new plan” the Annex access was removed.
Mayor Noam Bramson expressed his pleasure with the Council’s unanimous vote and felt “New Rochelle is back in business” with this new plan. Naparstek was “ecstatic” with the new plan. However the need to move the City Yard is still considered a key element in this decision process since the City Council must vote for the bonding necessary to make a move to the proposed Beechwood Avenue site.
After the meeting Councilman Albert Tarantino felt this new agreement gives the Council the opportunity to bring all the parts of this proposal together simultaneously. It “allows us to go forward on the plan for the Armory, City Yard and Forest City Residential.” When all parts of the plan are in front of us at one time, the costs of the Forest City Residential proposal and what they are willing to pay for will be evident. The DEIS will also come back and all costs will be in front of us.
Residents according to Bob Petrucci can’t understand how a project can first be proposed and now go down the road for X years and still our mayor and retinue have no idea how much money the city even “might” make. “The developer has an idea, no corporation would even let it out of the gate and yet this travesty rolls along. So we have questions. Why exactly and financially does the mayor like this project, especially in such miserable economic times and years? No revenue numbers were ever provided. Before anything else is done, we urge that the city tell residents how much money this plan will make for them and by when. If no one knows now, then why are they still pushing to do it?”
Ron Tocci, former State Assemblyman and Co-Chair of the Save Our Armory Committee, felt this new MOU was a “win-win for everybody. It will provide the information from the environmental impact statement (DEIS) that shows what the Forest City plan is all about and it gives an opportunity to anyone interested in developing the Armory to show what they can do with it.”
In the April 26, 2012 issue of the Westchester Guardian.
The Developers have a profit strategy and plan we don’t!
The developers have their own vision and profit plan in mind. Any developer going into a project is already going to have a plan and some fundamental financial picture of return on investment. That is how they determine how big to build and what is needed for a maximum profit. New Rochelle has no Master Plan. History has shown us that most of the council members of the past and some present don’t have a vision for New Rochelle and where it should be going. No road map of success. Only the illusions of success sold to them by the same developers over and over again. Anyone have three beans for a dollar Jack?
As to a vision, who’s vision and who’s plan? Has anyone seen what was built at Ridge Hill by Forest City? I will never go back there even if my life depended on it. Thank god it wasn’t busy. The concept is good but poorly executed. The layout has a very familiar pattern. Except it is over the top on execution. It is modeled after a Downtown shopping district but with a much longer amount of space in-between all of the stores. The design is not very conducive to wandering in and out of shops like a normal downtown area. The rejuvenated concept for the upgrades at Cross County is far superior. It is a pleasure to go to these days. We already have a Downtown area with the opportunity to shop and wander. If it were given some planning and attention it is a very viable area. With no plan on the cities part the developers convince the council time and again to build big and in different areas where they can get the land for a great deal with tax abatements.
For once we need to have our own plan so we can see some return on our investment. Fix what we have before going on to the pie in the sky developer ideas that cost the taxpayers every time. Other cities and villages have rejuvenated their downtown areas successfully why can’t we look at their successes and see what we can apply here in New Rochelle. We have the local people and knowledge. Let’s put our resources to good use.
“Common Sense for the Common Good”
The Plan for Return on Investment
Forest City’s publicly stated requirement for the return on investment (ROI) is 8%. Expected return on the development is 2%. Guess who pays the extra 6%? You do. You the taxpayer. This IS how it works. The developer knows generally how much the project will return and they will request for, and receive a tax abatement or PILOT to make up the rest. This has all been calculated in the background. They wouldn’t go forward if they didn’t know what they are going to get. It’s that simple. Forest City could just as easily invest the same money without constructing a single building and get a 2% return, but why stop there if someone else (taxpayers in this case) will kick in an additional 6% minimum ? Winner – Forest City, Loser – New Rochelle.
The nail on the head and in the coffin!
I see said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw.
My point exactly! We have people in office and the city management however who think we don’t already know this. Noor can us as Joe Blows even understand it. Then they try to slip something through another way with smoke and mirrors. Yet again, there is no plan except on how to get the project through under the radar. Worse yet, right in our faces.
Developers (like Forest City) want 1 thing: to make money!
Bramson’s delusional if he thinks the city is making anything off this or can somehow come out on top or ahead. In fact I don’t see how anyone can think the city can win against Forest City.
Its like making a bet with Wall Street. Do you think Wall Street will lose the bet? Never in a million years. They’re pros at what they do and there’s no beating them.
Same goes for developers like Forest City & Cappelli. They want 1 thing: to make money and they could careless what happens to New Rochelle. Don’t give them the abatemnts or the land for this project & they’re gone.