Community Groups Sue City over Broadway Triangle
Opponents of the controversial plan to develop the 31-acre area of East Williamsburg called the Broadway Triangle sued the city yesterday in Supreme Court, charging racial and religious discrimination as well as failure to comply with due process. The coalition of 40 North Brooklyn community groups alleges that the plan for 1,895 new units of…
Opponents of the controversial plan to develop the 31-acre area of East Williamsburg called the Broadway Triangle sued the city yesterday in Supreme Court, charging racial and religious discrimination as well as failure to comply with due process. The coalition of 40 North Brooklyn community groups alleges that the plan for 1,895 new units of housing favor the Hasidic community by including a disproportionate number of three- and four-bedroom apartments to house larger Jewish families and by capping building height at eight stories, since Jews can’t take the elevator on the Sabbath. The suit points out that nearly half of the public housing in the area is currently occupied by Hasidic Jews, despite federal court orders requiring the end of discriminatory practices and despite the fact that the waiting list for such housing has remained at over 90 percent Latino and African American for more than 30 years. It also claims that the Ridgewood-Bushwick Senior Citizens Council and the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg received exclusive development rights in a no-bid process through their connections to Assemblyman Vito Lopez (D-Williamsburg), and that the city failed to submit its plans for review by Bedford-Stuyvesant’s Community Board 3, as required by land use regulations. Addressing some of these claims back in July, Councilman David Yassky (D-Williamsburg) said, “I want more housing, but I don’t want skyscrapers in the middle of Brooklyn … I can’t imagine that there are real grounds for a lawsuit.” GMAP
Racial and Religious Discrimination Alleged in Triangle [NY Daily News]
City Sued over Triangle Rezoning [Brooklyn Paper]
Triangle Debate Goes On over Eminent Domain [Brownstoner]
The Voice Calls Out Lopez [Brownstoner]
Markowitz Endorses Lopez’s Triangle Plan [Brownstoner]
Why isn’t Crooklyn instantly banned? forever!
Crooklyn should be banned for that comment. Disgusting.
Kens- Crooklyn is a mere worthless P.O.S speck on the ass of a fruit fly. He would never show up, never confront anyone because people like him are cowards. They have nothing,they accomplish nothing, they are nothing.
Oh wait- let me take the back. They do accomplish something. They make themselves look like the trash they are.
Crooklyn, tell us a little more about yourself. You need a time out from Mr. B.
Crooklyn, excuse me??????
I am making a big assumption here that you’re not a WASP and if you’re not, after Hitler finished with the Jews, guess who would be next on his list. Read a bit of History will ya?
AND after making a polite argument, here is another one, WHY DON’T YOU SHUT THE FUCK YOURSELF AND COME TO ANY OF THE BROWNSTONER GATHERINGS AND SAY THAT FUCKING QUOTE DIRECTLY TO MY FACE? LET’S SEE WHO WILL END UP STANDING!!!!!!
P.S. I don’t give a fuck if I get pelalty box for that.
Wow.
*joins dirtyhipster*
Bubble — NYCHA has a long history of favoring whites over blacks and latinos in the distribution of “choice” public housing. In the 80s and early 90s, NYCHA actually published separate availability lists (the lists prospective tenants are given showing where there are public housing openings) with “W”s and “B”s at the top. The “W” lists were shown to whites, and the “B” lists were offered to blacks and latinos. The “W” lists routinely listed projects in Staten Island, the lower East Side and Queens (nicer projects, if you will) as available that did not appear on the “B” lists. The Legal Aid Society sued NYCHA over these practices in a case captioned Davis v. NYCHA, and to settle the suit NYCHA entered into a consent decree agreeing to offer blacks and latinos apartments in the better projects.
The Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund also brought suit against NYCHA for giving Jewish tenants in the Williamsburg projects preferential treatment over black and latino tenants. The allegations were that Jewish tenants were allowed to bend the rules (e.g., one tenant living in a 3 bedroom apt, which is grounds for NYCHA to move the tenant to a studio or 1 bedroom) in ways that black and latino tenants couldn’t. I believe NYCHA entered into a consent decree in that case as well.
So the fact that black and latino tenants are suspicious of NYCHA is not unfounded.
The true face of this suit shows its face…..
Woah – steps away from thread as things are about to get grimey.