ward_bakery_08_08.jpg
Two new developments in the Atlantic Yards saga. Atlantic Yards Report reveals that the Nets have three more years at the Meadowlands’ Izod Center, not two, meaning the 2010 opening date Bruce Ratner has been promoting may be nothing more than a pipe dream; we might be looking at 2012 for the team’s debut. Besides the team’s schedule, there’s the issue of construction. Ratner tells some outlets that groundbreaking won’t begin until January; to others, he says November.

As construction remains stalled at the site, a lawsuit goes forward. Nine property owners and tenants filed a petition against the Empire State Development Corporation in the Appellate Division Second Department of New York State Supreme Court. They’ve got five beefs: The seizure of their property violates the public use clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution; violates the due process clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution; violates the equal protection clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution; violates the low-income and current resident requirements of the New York Constitution; and violates the “public use, benefit or purpose” requirement contained in New York’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL). They expect to hear the case in January of 09, apparently long before a single building will rise on the site. Check out the press release below.
AY Arena Might Open 2011 [AY Report]
Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation [DDDB]
Appeal Over Atlantic Yards Suit Filed [Brownstoner]
Supreme Court Won’t Hear AY Eminent Domain Case [Brownstoner]
Photo by threecee.

DEVELOP DON’T DESTROY BROOKLYN

For Immediate Release: August 4, 2008

Nine Property Owners and Tenants File Atlantic Yards Eminent Domain Challenge in New York State Court

Petitioners Seek to Prevent New York State’s
Seizure of Their Homes and Businesses by Eminent Domain

BROOKLYN, NY— Late Friday nine property owners and tenants—with homes and businesses New York State wants to seize for developer Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards project—filed a petition with the Appellate Division of New York State Supreme Court seeking an order rejecting the Empire State Development Corporation’s (ESDC) findings and determination to seize their homes and businesses by eminent domain.

The court argument will likely be in January 2009.

“New York Courts have a proud history of interpreting the New York Constitution as providing greater protections for individual rights than the federal constitution. This case presents an opportunity to continue that tradition by declaring that the New York Constitution prohibits the government from seizing private homes simply to turn them over to a developer who covets them for a massive luxury condominium project,” said lead attorney Matthew Brinckerhoff of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP. “We are confident that the court will see this for what it is: government officials bending to the will of Bruce Ratner, allowing him to wield the power of eminent domain for his personal financial benefit.”

Facing the seizure of their homes and businesses, the petitioners have alleged five claims against the ESDC— the condemning authority utilized by Forest City Ratner to take the petitioners’ properties and give them to Forest City Ratner. The five claims are that the ESDC’s determination to forcibly seize the properties should be rejected because:

1. It violates the public use clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution.
ESDC’s claims of public benefit are a pretext to justify a private taking.

2. It violates the due process clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution.
The public process was a sham. The outcome was predetermined in a back room deal between Ratner, Pataki and Bloomberg.

3. It violates the equal protection clause contained in the Bill of Rights of the New York Constitution.
By singling out the petitioners, for unequal, adverse, treatment, and selecting Ratner as the recipient of irrational largess, the ESDC violated the petitioners’ right to equal protection under the law.

4. It violates the low-income and current resident requirements of the New York Constitution.
The New York State Constitution provides that no loan or subsidy shall be made to aid any project unless the project contains a plan for the remediation of blight and the “occupancy of any such project shall be restricted to persons of low income as defined by law and preference shall be given to persons who live or shall have lived in such area or areas.”
The Atlantic Yards project is not “restricted to persons of low income” and no preference has been given to “persons who live or shall have lived in such area.”

5. It violates the “public use, benefit or purpose” requirement contained in New York’s Eminent Domain Procedure Law (EDPL).

ESDC’s determination that petitioners’ homes and businesses will serve a “public use, benefit or purpose” has no basis in fact or law.

The petition to the Court for the case, Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation, can be downloaded at: www.dddb.net/eminentdomain

————————————————
Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn—in its effort to defend the homes and businesses of community members and advocate for their rights—organized the eminent domain lawsuit, and raises the funds for the lawsuit.

————————————————
DEVELOP DON’T DESTROY BROOKLYN leads a broad-based community coalition
fighting for development that will unite our communities instead of dividing and destroying them
DDDB is 501c3 non-profit corporation supported by over 4,000 individual donors from the community.

###


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. “I’m really sick of smug, arrogant jackasses calling people who they don’t know and have no clue about what background or education they have, ”

    bxgrl you smack that out of the park! There are plenty of smug, arrogant jackasses here! But don’t get upset! The implosion will take care of that. I wonder how many smug, arrogant jackasses will be posting here next year..

    The What

    Someday smug, arrogant jackasses is gonna end…

  2. fsrq- you know, I’m really sick of smug, arrogant jackasses calling people who they don’t know and have no clue about what background or education they have, clueless. Want to talk about the efficiency and environmental benefits of high density? take a look at China. Now there’s a helluva carbon footprint. So unless you’re talking about a very controlled development process where everyone does what they’re supposed to, yeah- it could work. Unfortunately your projection is based more on maximizing profit margins than environmentalist issues. And as long as that takes precedence, Beijing here we come. Unlike you, I may be clueless, but I’m not blind nor in denial.

    As speaking of denial, 40% slated to be affordable housing. take a closer look at those numbers and the income range. I should subsidize people with affordable housing who make 100,000 a year? Let’s not be idiots about this. And there is also that little clause about the fact that Ratner has the right to build that affordable housing off site. If in fact it ever gets built at all. And if you believe it will just because Ratner told you so, I have a bridge and a large piece of green cheese I can sell you.

  3. I’m by no stretch an AY/Ratner fan, but fsrg is correct regarding density and the environment and the efficiency of resources. The energy crisis is growing and is only going to get much worse. Any pre-election drops in gas/oil prices are purely temporary and political. We’re going to see a huge move towards urbanization as unless a sustainable, alternative and environmentally friendly energy solution is found. The past 70 or so years of suburban living as we know it will be a thing of the past. I’m not saying Atlantic Yards is THE solution, but we need some alternatives to prepare for and accomodate a migration back to the cities that’s expected over the next few decades.

  4. And as for your last post – ignoring the fact that 40% or so of AY is slated to be “affordable” – every single unit of housing – no matter what the price has a downward pressure on prices in the long term.

    It is really a simple question. In my 2020 Brooklyn 6500 units of housing are built and being lived in at AY (thats approximatley 12,000 people)

    In your 2020 Brooklyn 1500 units are built at AY (no ofiices or Arena either – about 3,000 people) –

    So forget about the demographics of those people for a second – just answer WHERE do you have these other 9,000 people living in YOUR 2020 Brooklyn?

  5. bxgirl – “But while you can use density as the catch all phrase, too much density in one area puts more strain on the environment, and drains resources from the surrounding areas.”

    No it doesn’t – this is blatantly false when you are talking about a Global (or even regional) environmental issues.

    Density allows for the most efficient power delivery (most electricity generated is lost in transit), lowest carbon footprint (in terms of transportation, delivery, and HVAC) and economies of scale in terms of handling pollution, sewage and refuse.

    No offense but you do not have a clue as to what you are talking about re: the environmental impact of high density vs. lower density living.

  6. If AY were the only development in sight I’s say worry. But they’re not. And we’re talking luxury housing- not affordable or subsidized. Those people have choices and there is not guarantee they would even want to live in AY.

  7. CMU – The Unity Plan calls for 1500 units of housing which is is FIVE THOUSAND (5000) less units than Atlantic Yards as currently designed.

    While I concur it that isnt (modern) suburban density, where do you suggest those other 5,000 units (probably 10,000 people) go live?

  8. fsrq- I happen to care very much. But while you can use density as the catch all phrase, too much density in one area puts more strain on the environment, and drains resources from the surrounding areas. There has to be a balance. AY isn’t it.And for a different take on putting development on top of already strained transit hubs, please read the panel discussion held at MCNY last month at: http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2008/07/
    at-mcny-panel-defending-dissent-and.html. It’s very interesting.

    cmu- sorry to give you the impression aesthetics weren’t important to me. they are very much but I’ve found in the past if I say that I get jumped on for not looking at what is supposedly so much more important. Most people don’t think the visual or psychological aspects of city living are important compared to the financial aspects, and I think just the opposite, so I agree with you on that completely.

  9. “I know you are probably intoxicated by the fame your rants gained you back in early summer – but really your 15mins in that regard is up – you are not going to get anymore press for being a blog poster”

    Naw fsrg! The implosion ofd the Mutant Asset Bubble is doing for me!

    “- and you would do yourself (and everyone else) a big favor if you stopped with that stupidity enough to actually get yourself heard.”

    Nope Asshat, The prophecy is being fulfilled…. You notice no one tries to refute my arguments anymore. That’s funny isn’t it, stupid!

    “If you cared even slightly about Global Warming, dependence on Oil, or the environment in general – you would recognize that DENSITY is EXACTLY what the Government should be promoting at a site like AY. It is adjacent/atop to the largest Mass Transit hub in the country (in terms of # of lines intersecting). Such plots are available very very infrequently.”

    This statement show what a retard you are. The price of oil is going down because 1. The Elections 2. The Hee Haw states are getting their assess kicked right now and need cheap gas to get around!!!

    Atlantic Yards is DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Get this thru your skull…………….

    The What

    Someday this war is gonna end…

1 2 3 4 5 6