Atlantic Yards Hit with Seventh Lawsuit by Sarah Ryley ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) ), published online 04-09-2007 Opponents Ask Court To Make Project Start Review, Approval Process Over By Sarah Ryley Brooklyn Daily Eagle FORT GREENE — Opponents of the Atlantic Yards arena and high-rise development filed a lawsuit yesterday seeking an annulment of the project’s approval based on deficiencies in its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), bringing the tally of project-related lawsuits to seven. The plaintiffs, which include 26 community groups ranging from neighborhood block associations to the Sierra Club, will be asking state Supreme Court Justice Joan Madden (Manhattan) to stop demolition and construction until the case is resolved. If they win, the project would have to start the entire review and approval process over again, which could take years. Project developer Forest City Ratner Companies, the ESDC, the Public Authorities Control Board and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority are all named as defendants. “The suit filed today by project opponents should come as no surprise to anyone, as the opponents have claimed publicly that their strategy is to sue early and often,” said FCRC Executive Vice President Bruce Bender. “[Yesterday]’s action is simply the latest in a long line of attempts to derail Atlantic Yards and the over 2,500 units of affordable housing, thousands of jobs for the community, job training programs, a new precedent for minority and women workers and contractors, and a new exciting home for the Nets [basketball team],” said Bender. “We believe that the opponents’ claims are without merit and we will prevail in court.” Daniel Goldstein, a plaintiff in one of two lawsuits challenging the project’ s use of eminent domain, said preparations “to challenge what we knew would be a flawed FEIS” have been three years in the making, “because we knew it would be predetermined who the developer of the project would be.” Goldstein is also the spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn (DDDB), the group leading opposition to the project that is named in this lawsuit and two others. Central to arguments against the project is the fact that no other developers were seriously considered for redevelopment of the Vanderbilt Yards, situated at the intersection of Atlantic and Fourth avenues, and essential to the 22-acre project. “For nearly four years, we participated in an exhaustive public review process, involving hundreds of meetings with local leaders and officials, including numerous public hearings, as well as countless meetings with community representatives,” said Bender. “We have also complied with rigorous state and city requirements, resulting in what we believe is a better project.” Does an Arena Serve A ‘Civic Purpose’? The lawsuit also seeks a declaration that a privately-leased and operated sports arena does not meet the definition of a “civic project” under the Urban Development Corporation Act, which was established in the 1960s to fast-track urban renewal. The act gives the ESDC the power to issue bonds and grant tax abatements, condemn land and seize property through eminent domain, and to overrule local zoning laws without acquiring legislative approval for urban renewal-related projects. The ESDC has often used its authority to spur private development. The Jacob K. Javits Convention Center and the redevelopment of Times Square, which both used eminent domain, and the World Trade Center Memorial Fund are a few examples. Opponents of the project said the Barclays Center — named after Barclays Bank purchased the naming rights for the Nets arena and immediately surrounding high-rises — is not a civic project because community groups would only have use of the arena for 10 events a year, at a prohibitively high price. Community groups would be charged $100,000 to hold events like high school graduations at the Barclays Center, according to a state-mandated financial analysis of the project. Other nights would be used for Nets basketball games and concerts. The lawsuit contends that “the home of a professional sports team and commercial venue [is] by no stretch of the imagination a ‘facility for educational, cultural, recreational, community, municipal, public service or other municipal purposes.’” Supporters of the project have argued that the affordable housing and jobs it provides would also serve a civic purpose. “Another delay in the Atlantic Yards project means delaying economic opportunity for many in the Brooklyn community,” said Delia Hunley-Adossa, chair of the committee overseeing the project’s Community Benefits Agreement. “Those opposing the project can afford delays, but what of the over 2,000 who are clamoring for jobs, the hundreds of minority and women-owned contractors who’ve showed up at events looking for contracts, and the thousands seeking an affordable place to live?” Six Other Lawsuits Two of the other lawsuits oppose the project’s use of eminent domain, and another challenges its plan to relocate tenants living in the project’s footprint as insufficient. In another lawsuit, a landlord said leases of his property were illegally assigned to the developer. A previous DDDB suit claimed an ESDC lawyer presented a conflict of interest. Assemblyman James Brennan, D–Ditmas Park, recently filed a lawsuit against the state development corporation for disclosure of the project’s full business plan, only to find that the agency never saw one before, or after, it approved the project. In addition to the arena, the Atlantic Yards project would consist of 16 high-rises with office space, community facilities and up to 6,430 units of housing, and a hotel. The ESDC did not respond to questions about the lawsuit by press time yesterday. Errol Cockfield, spokesman for the agency, said its lawyers were still reviewing the case.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
