Gothamist77%

The near-collapsed Midtown building is now stable 32%

By David Brand72%

7/10/2026, 10:00:48 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 34 faulty reasoning types, including Optimism Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Attempt to Sell a Product or Service, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 21.3% saturation with 243 hits. Analysis detected 1,809 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,143 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 41.1% and a BS Rank of 32% (14,909 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 68.10% of the article peer group.

The near-collapsed Midtown building is now stable, but its finances may not be 
Published Jul 10, 2026 at 6:00 a.m. 
ET 
By submitting your information, you're agreeing to receive communications from New York Public Radio in accordance with our Terms . 
China News Service/Getty Images 
We rely on your support to make local news available to all 
Make your contribution now and help Gothamist thrive in 2026. 
Donate today 
Gothamist is funded by sponsors and member donations 
Picture yourself living high above the heart of Midtown, mere blocks from the Chrysler Building and the United Nations  your 21st story bedroom window offering sweeping views of the cityscape leading north to Central Park and beyond. 
There’s just one minor detail: The apartment nearly collapsed before you moved in, sparking the mass evacuation of not just the building, but a large swath of the neighborhood, after workers spotted key structural columns bending under the weight of the newly constructed floors above. 
It’s a real-life scenario for whoever moves into portions of the former Pfizer headquarters at 235 East 42nd St., where columns buckled on Tuesday, leaving a multi-story section of the building sagging above 43rd Street. 
“This project will definitely have a stigma,” said Ross Spivak, CEO of the firm RES Consulting NY. 
“You’re talking a significant structural failure.” 
Gothamist spoke with a half dozen developers, brokers, engineers and construction experts whose views differed on the impact the near-catastrophe will have on future leasing. 
But most agreed the bigger problem is whether the project  worth hundreds of millions of dollars  will continue to be financially viable if it takes too long to correct the problems and get tenants in the door. 
Every month of construction is extremely expensive. 
Louis Adler, REAL New York 
Spivak, who advises construction companies and developers, said even safety approvals from the city’s building department won’t be enough to squash lingering suspicions among some potential renters. 
“They may say it’s fine, but do you still think it’s fine?" 
Spivak said. 
“When there are structural failures or any serious issues, it makes people think.” 
But hardened real estate brokers disagreed. 
The allure of a place to live in the five boroughs is too great a force to dampen a New Yorker’s spirits in the quest for an apartment. 
“We have such a tight housing supply, people are willing to live in spaces after a well documented problem goes away,” said Douglas Wagner, director of brokerage services at Bond New York. 
“By the time the developer completes the rental units, so much time will have passed it won't be as dramatic a moment as it is today.” 
Just 1.4% of New York City apartments are vacant and available to rent, according to the city’s most recent housing survey  a 58-year low that is driving record-high rents. 
Louis Adler, co-founder of the brokerage REAL New York, said he doesn’t expect it to have an effect on future leasing. 
But he said there could be serious financial consequences for the owners, MetroLoft and David Werner Real Estate Investments, which took out a $720 million loan to complete the city’s largest office conversion project. 
“The bigger threat is that every month of construction is extremely expensive,” Adler said. 
“Who knows how long this pushes it out?” 
Madison Capital Realty, which made the $720 million construction loan , did not respond to a request for comment. 
Any delay is going to hurt them financially. 
Peter Varsalona, RAND Engineering & Architecture 
The project is the largest office-to-housing conversion in New York City and was expected to open to tenants next year. 
The owners will have to keep making loan payments, without generating any revenue from rent payments as early as they expected if the development stalls, said Brooklyn-based real estate developer Eli Lever. 
“The most expensive thing is the interest carry on the loan,” Lever said. 
“That’s a tremendous loan on this project.” 
MetroLoft Managing Director Mitchell Wasser said in a written statement that the company plans to “fully rebuild” a portion of the building above the broken structural columns. 
“We remain on schedule, and this work will not delay delivery of the building as it is such a small portion of the project,” Wasser said. 
“We are working around the clock so that operations can resume and life in the area can return to normal.” 
A spokesperson declined to comment on what rebuilding the portion of the building will actually entail and whether the building will face future stigma. 
MetroLoft specializes in office conversion projects and has completed more than a dozen in recent years, according to its website. 
MetroLoft founder Nathan Berman has described the structural problem as a  typical construction mishap  in interviews with the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. 
He declined interview requests from Gothamist. 
But Peter Varsalona, principal at RAND Engineering & Architecture, disagreed with Berman’s characterization of events and his forecast for what lies ahead. 
“There are attempts to downplay this and spin this as a ‘typical construction mishap,’” Varsalona said. 
“This is nowhere near that. 
It is a major blunder.” 
Varsalona, a licensed engineer and architect who has worked on other office conversions, said emergency shoring, renovations and city approvals could “stretch out for months,” delaying construction beyond the projected timeline. 
“Any delay is going to hurt them financially, rather significantly,” Varsalona said. 
Department of City Planning data shows property owners have sought approval to convert 44 different office buildings in New York City since 2020. 
Ten completed projects have resulted in roughly 4,200 apartments and condos, with nearly 14,000 more planned. 
Lever, the developer, said the problem could scare lenders away from other office conversion projects, which are considered relatively safe investments that are faster than ground-up construction. 
“Now people are like, ‘Oh wait are these legit?” 
Lever said. 
But, he added, if developers build it, renters will come. 
“People will say, ‘I’ll never move in there,’” Lever said. 
“But there’s so much demand.” 
David is a reporter covering housing for Gothamist and WNYC. 
Got a tip? 
Email [email protected] or Signal 908-310-3960. 
Skeletal remains found in vacant East Harlem building, police say 
A homeless veteran had been staying in the building for at least two years, according to a 311 complaint this year. 
Police haven't said if the remains are his. 
Published Jul 9, 2026 
The Central Park Conservancy wants horse-drawn carriages banned. 
Its poll says NYC agrees. 
The most passionate responses are from respondents favoring a ban, pollsters say. 
NY attorney general sues chemical companies for PFAS pollution 
We mapped every UES cooling tower in the area affected by NYC’s latest Legionnaires’ outbreak 
Education tech purchases on pause as NYC schools wrestle with AI 
Catch up on the most important headlines with a roundup of essential NYC stories, delivered to your inbox daily. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 4.7%David Brand: 1.9%Gothamist: 2.7%Confirmation Bias4.7%This article: 4.0%David Brand: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.5%Anchoring Bias4.0%This article: 8.4%David Brand: 2.9%Gothamist: 3.6%Availability Heuristic8.4%This article: 1.1%David Brand: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic1.1%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%David Brand: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.2%Overconfidence Bias2.4%This article: 6.4%David Brand: 9.0%Gothamist: 8.4%Framing Effect6.4%This article: 0.9%David Brand: 0.7%Gothamist: 1.2%Loss Aversion0.9%This article: 0.5%David Brand: 0.6%Gothamist: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.5%This article: 2.8%David Brand: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect2.8%This article: 10.8%David Brand: 4.3%Gothamist: 3.6%Optimism Bias10.8%This article: 3.7%David Brand: 1.3%Gothamist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias3.7%This article: 21.3%David Brand: 7.7%Gothamist: 8.5%Negativity Bias21.3%This article: 6.4%David Brand: 3.4%Gothamist: 2.6%Self-Serving Bias6.4%This article: 1.4%David Brand: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.0%Fundamental Attribution Error1.4%This article: 0.5%David Brand: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.5%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 1.8%Gothamist: 2.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.7%Gothamist: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.7%David Brand: 1.7%Gothamist: 2.1%Halo Effect1.7%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 3.1%David Brand: 1.8%Gothamist: 1.3%Recency Bias3.1%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%David Brand: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Ad Hominem1.9%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.2%David Brand: 3.3%Gothamist: 4.4%Appeal to Authority9.2%This article: 6.6%David Brand: 1.1%Gothamist: 1.2%False Dilemma6.6%This article: 0.7%David Brand: 0.9%Gothamist: 0.8%Slippery Slope0.7%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.7%David Brand: 3.3%Gothamist: 3.8%Hasty Generalization8.7%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.3%Gothamist: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 1.5%David Brand: 0.5%Gothamist: 0.8%Bandwagon1.5%This article: 8.7%David Brand: 5.8%Gothamist: 6.4%Appeal to Emotion8.7%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.6%Gothamist: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 2.6%David Brand: 2.5%Gothamist: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.6%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.4%Gothamist: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 2.8%David Brand: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.1%Appeal to Nature2.8%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 1.3%David Brand: 1.4%Gothamist: 2.8%Anecdotal1.3%This article: 2.4%David Brand: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.1%No True Scotsman2.4%This article: 7.9%David Brand: 1.0%Gothamist: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.9%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.0%Gothamist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.1%Gothamist: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.3%David Brand: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.2%Unattributed Quote3.3%This article: 1.5%David Brand: 0.8%Gothamist: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection1.5%This article: 7.3%David Brand: 4.1%Gothamist: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice7.3%This article: 2.7%David Brand: 1.2%Gothamist: 1.5%Indoctrination2.7%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 1.4%Gothamist: 1.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%David Brand: 0.2%Gothamist: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 9.0%David Brand: 0.6%Gothamist: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…9.0%

1143 words analyzed.

Speakers

13speakers54%attributed speech529writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageNew York Public Radio • 20 words • 100.0% coverageChina News Service/Getty Images • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageGothamist • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 17 words • 100.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 6 words • 0.0% coverageGothamist • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageLouis Adler • 5 words • 0.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 27 words • 0.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 12 words • 0.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 2 words • 0.0% coverageRoss Spivak • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageDouglas Wagner • 32 words • 0.0% coverageDouglas Wagner • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageLouis Adler • 21 words • 100.0% coverageLouis Adler • 34 words • 0.0% coverageLouis Adler • 14 words • 0.0% coverageLouis Adler • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 32 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 13 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 7 words • 0.0% coverageMitchell Wasser • 27 words • 100.0% coverageMitchell Wasser • 26 words • 0.0% coverageMitchell Wasser • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageMetroLoft • 20 words • 0.0% coverageNathan Berman • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 16 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 5 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 5 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 31 words • 0.0% coveragePeter Varsalona • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDepartment of City Planning • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 27 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 9 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 2 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 10 words • 0.0% coverageEli Lever • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageCentral Park Conservancy • 4 words • 0.0% coverageCentral Park Conservancy • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Nathan Berman

100%flagged-word coverage
27 attributed words4.4% of attributed speech61% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Biased Writer Voice-15.7 ptsWriter: 15.7%Nathan Berman: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -9.1 ptsWriter: 9.1%Nathan Berman: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-2.1 ptsWriter: 2.1%Nathan Berman: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.