Springfield Town Center – What’s Happening?
And I wish I could tell you. I’ve been trying to keep up with this project, which is so critical to the future of the area, but . . . it’s . . . taking . . . a . . . lot . . . of . . . time.

My last post on the subject, about three months ago, included information from Supervisor Jeff McKay’s office to the effect that construction on Phase One, including a new food court, movie theater and indoor renovations, should begin in April or May. Not happening. I was there yesterday and the only renovations to be seen are a small bit of torn up floor tiles, and a single set of the old off-white railings repainted grey, outside the interior Macy’s entrance upstairs. I’m told this work is preparatory to a test of some minor work planned for the rest of the mall interior.
McKay’s office remains confident that the project is on track because the various permit applications and meetings are continuing. The project received County rezoning approval last July, but McKay’s office says the various permitting requirements for a project of this magnitude are quite time-consuming.
The mall’s owner, Vornado Realty Trust, appears to be in strong financial condition despite the current state of the commercial real estate market. They are making a profit – unlike General Growth, the owner of Landmark Mall, who also had big plans but just went through the largest bankruptcy in US history.
However, Vornado has just this spring defaulted on mortgages for at least three projects – Springfield Mall ($164 million), High Point (NC) Merchandise Mart ($217 million) and The Cannery in San Francisco ($18 million). It is widely assumed that these defaults are strategic, designed to force the renegotiation of the mortgages for Vornado’s benefit, and that they want to continue to hold, manage and renovate the properties more or less as originally planned. That would make hardball business sense, I suppose, but it’s not the kind of dealing that would make me pleased to have Vornado as a major player in my town.
Update 5/12/2010: A scenario for your consideration – Vornado’s mortgage on the Mall is nonrecourse debt, meaning Vornado is not liable for making its lenders whole if the property is worth less than the mortgage. This is different from residential mortgages in most places, where the lender can file a judgment against you if you default, and recover losses from other assets you might have or acquire.
So, commercial property goes into general decline (which it has), plus Vornado “manages” the property in such a way as to make it less valuable – i.e., by losing most of the tenants, which seems to have been accomplished. (Remember, the anchor stores – Target, Macy’s Penney’s – are not tenants; they own their stores.) Then, Vornado defaults on it’s now much-less-valuable property – or threatens to. The lender, faced with renegotiating the debt or taking a possibly even bigger loss through foreclosure and resale, is now over a barrel – even if it forecloses and sells the property to the highest bidder, the highest bidder could still be Vornado or some shell company they own.
Hmmm . . . .
More news as I get it.




From the Springfield Connection:
