« The Stuff We Could Teach Jack Bauer | Main | New Public Advocate Assails Bloomberg’s Performance on Homelessness »
January 20, 2010
Lawyers: Yards neighbors will enjoy decades of blight
The Brooklyn Paper
by Stephen Brown
State officials condemned Prospect Heights to as much as 23 years of upheaval by ignoring the implications of giving Atlantic Yards developer Bruce Ratner more time to build his mega-development when they renegotiated their so-called sweetheart deal with the builder last summer, project opponents alleged in court on Tuesday.
Lawyers from a broad coalition of Atlantic Yards opponents made their argument in state Supreme Court in what is the final major case against the Empire State Development Corporation, the quasi-public agency supervising the project.
The plaintiffs’ main argument centered on what they believe is Ratner’s extended buildout for his 16-skyscraper residential, retail and arena project, which was originally supposed to be done by 2016.
The terms of the summer renegotiation allow Ratner to complete the project by 2031 — yet the state did not conduct a new environmental review to determine if such a long buildout would have dire consequences for the neighborhood.
Related coverage...
Mobilizing the Region, Brooklyn Groups: State Rushed Through Changes to Atlantic Yards
Several Brooklyn civic and community organizations, joined by local elected representatives, argued in state court today that the Empire State Development Corporation improperly rushed through major changes to the Atlantic Yards project without legally required study.
The modified plan changed the schedule for construction, delaying the finished product by 17 years and deferring the creation of public space. It expands the size of the surface parking at the site, seemingly creating the “blight” that the state has used to justify the use of eminent domain in the first place. The effects of the expanded timeline on the surrounding neighborhoods were not studied in a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, ignoring the “hard look” required under state environmental law.
In addition to altering the construction plan, the suit contends that ESDC improperly ceded decision power over future changes to the development plan to Forest City Ratner, the developer.
Posted by eric at January 20, 2010 10:51 AM