- Extell Development Co. Plan
- UNITY Community Dev. Plan
- Community Design Principles
- Agreements
- Contact Elected Officials
- Economic Analyses & Documents
   > IRS Bond Regulations
- Environmental Documents
- Legal Documents
   > Eminent Domain Lawsuit
   > EIS Lawsuit
   > MGPP Lawsuit
   > MTA Lawsuit
- Letitia James Remixed
- Letters
- Memoranda of Understanding
- News Articles/Commentary
- Position Papers
- Times Report
- White Papers
- MTA RFP & Appraisal
tel/fax: 718.362.4784

Please note our new postal address when sending contributions to the legal fund:
121 5th Avenue, PMB #150
Brooklyn, New York 11217


-No Land Grab.org
-Atlantic Yards Report
-The Footprint Gazette
-Brooklyn Matters
-Brooklyn Views
-The Brooklyn Papers

-New York Games.org
-Field of Schemes
more..

Acronym Guide:
FCR
- Forest City Ratner

ESDC - Empire State Development Corporation
(Chairman Dennis Mullen)

PACB - Public Authorities Control Board (Silver, Sampson, Paterson)

IBO - Independent Budget Office

NYCEDC - New York City Economic Development Corporation

SEQRA - State Environmental Qualitry Review Act

DEIS
- Draft Environmental Impact Statement

EIS
- Environmental Impact Statement

ULURP - Uniform Land Use Review Procedure

Legal Status | Developer's Status

Recent key news items:


Did Gerges decision in March moot final Atlantic Yards case? Same grounds, new context. Oral argument Monday should be vigorous.

April 9, 2010. Atlantic Yards Report

Suit: ESDC lied to judge about Yards timetable
April 8, 2010. The Brooklyn Paper

Deep bench at the groundbreaking? There were only enough Brooklyn elected officials to play three-on-three
March 16, 2010. Atlantic Yards Report

Team hype: pomp and (questionable) promises, bitter (and near-final?) protest mark ceremonial groundbreaking for Barclays Center arena

March 12, 2010. Atlantic Yards Report

Why the Atlantic Yards Is Currently a Loser for Everyone, Even Ratner
March 10, 2010. Chris Smith. New York Magazine. Daily Intel

Gerges dismisses challenge to condemnation; no barrier to project construction; streets to close March 8
March 1, 2010. Atlantic Yards Report

Condemnation on hold after judge promises prompt review of claims; streets unlikely to close on February 1
February 1, 2010. Atlantic Yards Report

Avaricious developers and governments twist the meaning of 'blight'
January 23, 2010. George Will, Washington Post

Independent Budget Office (IBO) Fiscal Brief on the Arena [pdf]
The Proposed Arena at Atlantic Yards: An Analysis of City Fiscal Gains and Losses
September, 2009


--------------------------------------
WHAT'S UP WITH THE DEVELOPER...as of April 10, 2010

March 11, 2010
Forest City Ratner, with Markowitz, Bloomberg, Paterson and only six Brooklyn politicians holds an exclusive and opulent Groundtaking ceremony amidst prolonged and loud protest (and an over-reaction from police). [More must see video.]

Deal to sell the Nets and a portion of the arena to Russian oligarch Mikhail Prokhorov hasn't closed.

December 23, 2009
Ratner signs a "master closing." The closing documents and the bond proceeds go into escrow. Legal challenges and hurdles remain. ESDC files peition to take privat properties by eminent domain.

December 23, 2009
The Brooklyn Arena Local Development Corporation sells $511 million worth of bonds for Ratner's arena.
Days later...serious questions are raised about the legality of that bond sale.


On September 23, 2009 Forest City Ratner announced a signed letter of intent to sell 80% of the Nets and 45% of the arena to Russia's richest man Mikhail Prokhorov. The deal is contingent on the outcome of lawsuits and success or failure of arena bond financing. On December 16th, that deal was signed.

On September 9, 2009 Forest City Ratner released new designs for the arena; they represent the sixth new design.

On September 17, 2009 the ESDC Board re-rubberstamped the project.



--------------------------------------
WHAT'S PENDING IN COURT...as of April 10, 2010
One pending lawsuit...

PETER WILLIAMS vs. NYS URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP
Oral argument on Article 78 seeking to compel ESDC to make new EDPL 204 findings

April 12, 2010
9:30 AM
80 Centre Street, Manhattan

Some owners and tenants in the footprint brought this lawsuit in January 2010 arguing that the eminent domain takings were based on a plan that no longer exists -- if the takings are going to occur,  they must be for the current plan,  which is a basketball arena and one building,  not for the project originally conceived with the promise of 2, 250 affordable housing and jobs. So the takings require new findings and determinations by ESDC. The suit is in Manhattan State Supreme Court.

___________

New York State took title to all the properties in the footprint after Judge Gerges' ruled to grant ESDC's petition to take title ownership on March 1, 2010.

Eminent Domain Lawsuit - Goldstein et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation
Click for all case files



--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawsuit Seeks to Annul September 17, 2009 ESDC Approval of Atlantic Yards Modified General Project Plan on Multiple Grounds
DDDB et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation et al.
Filed October 13, 2009


>Judge Marcy Friedman ruled for New York State/ESDC on March 10, 2010
> Oral argument was held on January 19, 2010.


>> April 8, 2010
DDDB Files Motion Asking Court to Reconsider Case Against Atlantic Yards Project Approval
Motion Follows New Evidence New York State Intentionally Omitted From Legal Record

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Enviromental Impact Statement (EIS) Lawsuit
-
DDDB et al. v. Empire State Development Corporation

Petitioners filed a motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals on July 31, 2009.
The Court denied this motion on December 1, 2009. On December 23rd, the plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider the motion for leave.
>> February 16, 2010: The Court of Appeals denies the motion


July 31, 2009: The petitioners file a motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.


On June 30 the the Appellate Division denied the petitoners motion for leave to appeal.

Petitioners ask the Appellate Division for the right to appeal to the Court of Appeals.


Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn et al. File Motion Seeking Appeal of Adverse Ruling in Court of Appeals on Atlantic Yards EIS Lawsuit
Press Release: March 30, 2009

In effort to appeal EIS case, plaintiffs charge "evidence of corruption" in ESDC's blight study
Atlantic Yards Report. March 30, 2009

Press Release on the Ruling

Press Coverage on the Ruling:
Appellate court, despite some misgivings, dismisses EIS case; one judge concurs but slams blight study, says his hands were tied
--Atlantic Yards Report

Atlantic Yards developer wins key legal victory
Forest City Ratner gets a green light from courts but still needs one from banks.
--Crain's New York Business


Concerns 'Legitimate' But Project Proceeds
--New York Law Journal

Legal Victory for Atlantic Yards Developer
--New York Times City Room Blog

Breaking news! Ratner wins a big Yards case
--The Brooklyn Paper

DDDB et al. v. ESDC et al.
Appeal on state lawsuit against the Atlantic Yards Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and approval.
In the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1st Department (Manhattan)

Click for all case files



Oral arguments took place on September 17th in State Appellate Court in Manahttan


In appeal of case challenging AY environmental review, some justices skeptical of state’s blight claim
Atlantic Yards Report. September 18, 2008.

Press Release on the argument:
Oral Argument in Appeal on Atlantic Yards Environmental Review and Approval Focuses on Key Issue of Blight
State Appellate Court Justices Skeptical About New York State’s Blight Claim As Basis for Bruce Ratner’s Project


July 7, 2008
DDDB and 25 Co-Plaintiffs File Appeal in Lawsuit Against the Empire State Development Corporation, MTA & PACB
Plaintiffs Seek to Overturn Supreme Court Decision on Suit Seeking to Annul Fatally Flawed Environmental Impact Statement and Approval of Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards Proposal
Click to download pdf of the appeal

--------------------------------------------------------------------
June 23, 2008:
The US Supreme Court declined to accept the plaintiffs' petition. The plaintiffs will pursue the defense of their rights in New York state court. Press Release

Goldstein et a. v. Pataki et al.
Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit -11 Homeowners, business owners and tenants are challenging the Constitutionality of NY State's use of eminent domain to seize their properties.

On March 31, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a petition to the United States Supreme Court to hear their case.

The questions presented to the Court and the petition itself can be found here.

Kelo Sequel to Court
By Lyle Denniston. SCOTUSblog.com. April 1, 2008.

More coverage of the filing from the Atlantic Yards Report and an roundup of other coverage here.

--------------------------------------
Previously:

DDDB et al. v. ESDC et al.

State lawsuit against the Atlantic Yards Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and approval


Preliminary appeal briefs are here.

The Appellate Court has set the appeal schedule. Plaintiffs are to file their appeal briefs in July, and there will be an argument scheduled in the September (2008) term.
More information here.

On January 11th, State Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden issued her decision against the community plaintiffs challenging the review and approval of the Atlantic Yards project.

The judge's decision is here [pdf]. DDDB's press release is here.
We believe the case was wrongly decided and are appealing.

Atlantic Yards Report coverage is here.

--------------------------------------



For Immediate Release: February 1, 2008

New York, NY— The Second Circuit Court today ruled against 14 homeowners, business owners and tenants in their appeal of their lawsuit alleging that New York State's use of eminent domain to take their properties for Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project violates the United States Constitution.

Plaintiffs' attorney Matthew Brinckerhoff said, "Today's decision is disappointing. We disagree with its conclusion. We intend to ask the US Supreme Court to hear our case, and will continue to pursue every avenue available to prevent the unlawful seizure of my clients' homes for Bruce Ratner's enrichment. The court today affirmed that the government is free to take private homes and businesses and give them to influential citizens as long as one can imagine a conceivable benefit to the public, no matter how small or unlikely it may be. Indeed, it does not matter if all evidence points to a secret back room deal. All corrupt politicians need do to insulate themselves from judicial scrutiny is claim a benefit to the public. This is wrong. It should trouble all citizens who, unlike Bruce Ratner, lack the power and money to coopt the governments' power of eminent domain for their private use. We believe that the United States Supreme Court will welcome the opportunity to clarify this area in light of its widely criticized Kelo decision."

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn legal director Candace Carponter said, "Our support of the fight of citizens to live safely in their homes, and operate safely in their business, will continue. We maintain that the government's motivation in using eminent domain for Atlantic Yards is not to benefit the public, but rather, to benefit a single, very rich and powerful developer. The seizure of our neighbors' homes and businesses is at the very foundation of the Atlantic Yards project. It is a foundation that must not stand. Now is the time for our elected leaders, who have frequently expressed grave concern about the abuse of eminent domain, to publicly stand in defense of everyday Brooklynites and New Yorkers."

The 2nd Circuit Court's opinion on the case, Goldstein v. Pataki, can be found at: http://www.dddb.net/php/reading/legal/eminentdomain



On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs are appealing Judge Garaufis' June 6th decision.

On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response to the appeal. That reply brief is here [pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.

Oral argument on the appeal was heard on October 9th. The three judge panel can decide on the plaintiffs appeal any time. Press coverage of the courtroom argument, and other related news, follows:

Appellate judge's recusal may be good news for AY eminent domain plaintiffs
Atlantic Yards Report. January 16, 2008.

Moment of Truth: Court to determine if Ratner gets land
Brooklyn Paper.

Atlantic Yards case is strong
Editorial. Brooklyn Paper.

Eminent domain appeal faces engaged but skeptical panel
Atlantic Yards Report

Judge Hears Arguments In Brooklyn Eminent Domain Case
NY1

Brooklyn lawyer: Arena not a public use
USAToday (AP)

U.S. Court Hears Opponents of Atlantic Yards Argue for Reinstating Suit
NY Times

Arguments Are Heard in Atlantic Yards Case
NY Times' City Room blog





WHAT'S PENDING as of January 10, 2008:
State Supreme Court Case Challenging the Review & Approval of "Atlantic Yards"

After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.On July 17 the court contacted the attorneys for the parties to announce that the court clerk has changed the case's designation from "standard" to "complex," and that Justice Madden has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days from the May 3rd oral argument was on August 31st; which means that today marks 252 days since the oral argument.

A decision can come any time.

Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs are appealing Judge Garaufis' June 6th decision.

On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response to the appeal. That reply brief is here [pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.

Oral argument on the appeal was heard on October 9th. The three judge panel can decide on the plaintiffs appeal any time. Press coverage of the courtroom argument follows:

Moment of Truth: Court to determine if Ratner gets land
Brooklyn Paper.

Atlantic Yards case is strong
Editorial. Brooklyn Paper.

Eminent domain appeal faces engaged but skeptical panel
Atlantic Yards Report

Judge Hears Arguments In Brooklyn Eminent Domain Case
NY1

Brooklyn lawyer: Arena not a public use
USAToday (AP)

U.S. Court Hears Opponents of Atlantic Yards Argue for Reinstating Suit
NY Times

Arguments Are Heard in Atlantic Yards Case
NY Times' City Room blog


WHAT'S PENDING as of October 4, 2007:

State Supreme Court Case Challening the Review & Approval of "Atlantic Yards"

After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.On July 17 the court contacted the attorneys for the parties to announce that the court clerk has changed the case's designation from "standard" to "complex," and that Justice Madden has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days from the May 3rd oral argument was on August 31st; which means that today marks 154 days since the oral argument.

This means that a decision can come any time.

Federal Eminent Domain Lawsuit
On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs are appealing Judge Garaufis' June 6th decision.

On September 20th plaintiffs filed their reply to the defendants' response to the appeal. That reply brief is here [pdf]. All legal briefs since the case was filed in October 2006 are here.

Oral argument on the appeal is scheduled for this Tuesday Oct. 9, at 10am at 500 Pearl Street in Manhattan. Ceremonial Courtroom (9th Floor). [Map]


WHAT'S PENDING as of August 23, 2007:
After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.Today, June 19, marks 10 weeks since the oral argument. On July 17 the court contacted the attorneys for the parties to announce that the case has changed the case's designation from "standard" to "complex," and that Justice Madden has up to 120 days to render a decision. 120 days from the May 3rd oral argument would take us to August 31st.

On July 31st attorneys for plaintiffs on the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki filed their appeal brief to the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs are appealing Judge Garaufis' June 6th decision.

Oral argument on the appeal is scheduled for Oct. 9, 10am.


WHAT'S PENDING as of June 13, 2007:
Complete, comprehensive coverage of the May 3rd court hearing in the Manhattan State Supreme Court in front of Justice Joan Maden, can be found at the Atlantic Yards Report: ESDC grilled over blight, “civic project” in EIS lawsuit hearing, but judge’s latitude may be limited.

After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.Today, June 13, is 6 weeks, so a decision could come any day.

On June 6th Eastern District Justice Nicholas Garaufis issued a decision on the defendants' motion to dismiss the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki. While Judge Garaufis rejected the defendants' three motions attempting to push the case out of federal court and into state court, he decided to dimiss the case for plaintiffs' failure to state a claim. We stronlgy believe that the Court erred in its decision and there will be an appeal on the decision brought to the 2nd Circutin Court. We are cautiously optimistic that the plaintiffs can win their appeal and move on to a trial to show how the use of eminent domain for Altnatic Yards violates the US Constituion. Our view on the decision and the appeal can be found in our e-newsletter from June 7th, 2007.

Atlantic Yards Report covered the decision, Judge dismisses federal eminent domain lawsuit; appeal planned, as did the NY Times and the New York Law Journal


WHAT'S PENDING as of May 7, 2007:
Complete, comprehensive coverage of the May 3rd court hearing in the Manhattan State Supreme Court in front of Justice Joan Maden, can be found at the Atlantic Yards Report: ESDC grilled over blight, “civic project” in EIS lawsuit hearing, but judge’s latitude may be limited.

After the nearly 4-hour hearing for DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al., a suit which seeks to annul the environmental review and approval of "Atlantic Yards," Justice Madden said she would try to have a decision within 4 to 6 weeks.

Simultaneously a decision on the defendants' motion to dismiss the federal eminent domain lawsuit Goldstein v. Pataki,can come any day from Eastern District Justice Nicholas Garaufis. The most recent inforamtion regarding that case is also found at Atlantic Yards Report: Another look at the eminent domain hearing: signs point both ways


Thursday, May 3rd. 3:30pm
Oral Argument in Manhattan State Supreme Court on the environmental lawsuit
DDDB et. al. v. ESDC et. al.

60 Centre Street, Room 351
Justice Joan Madden

WHAT'S PENDING as of April 5, 2007:

On April 5 DDDB and 25 co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in State Supreme Court seeking to annul the Environmental Review and approval of the "Atlantic Yards" project. The named defendants are the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB), the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and Forest City Ratner. A summary of the lawsuit's causes of actions are here.

Success in the suit would send "Atlantic Yards" back to the ESDC for a complete or partial new environmental review and a new vote by the PACB. But this time, all of that would occur under the reform-minded Spitzer Administration.

Oral arguments in the Manhattan State Supreme Court House are scheduled for May 3rd at 3:30 pm.

WHAT'S PENDING as of January 1, 2007:
On December 20th the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB) voted to approve the "Atlantic Yards" project, just 11 days before Governor Pataki left office and despite an incredible dearth of pertinent and crucial financial information, housing guarantees, and many unanswered questions.

This means that the project has passed its one and only political vote by three-men-in-a-room.

Big questions remain:
  1. Will Governor Spitzer and his Administration weigh in?

  2. There is a pending federal eminent domain lawsuit, and the project cannot be built if the property owners and tenants win their suit. Oral arguments for that lawsuit are scheduled for February 7th in the Eastern District. Legal briefs can be found here.

  3. A legal challenge to the Environmental Impact Statement could come any day.


WHAT'S PENDING as of December 8, 2006:
The ESDC approved the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and its findings, the findings and determinations under the state's Eminent Domain Procedure Law (approving its use), and a modified General Project Plan. All of those documents can be found here: www.empire.state.ny.us/atlanticYards.

Next up vote, which must be unanimous, by the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB), which is controlled by the Governor, the Assembly Speaker Silver, and the Senat Majority Leader Bruno. That vote could occur on December 20th.

Lawsuits are expected on the FEIS. There is currently a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the use of eminent domain for Atlantic Yards. That case, filed on October 26th, is in the Eastern District.

WHAT'S PENDING as of November 15, 2006:
The Finale Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was released by the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) on November 15, 2006. The very large document can be found here: www.empire.state.ny.us/AtlanticYards/FEIS.asp

The ESDC is supposed to respond to every comment made by the public. Chapter 24 includes those commetns and responses: click here to download the pdf of Chapter 24.

The ESDC now has a minimum of ten days to approve the findings of the FEIS. That vote is expected sometime around November 28th. The ESDC will then pass the project along to the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB). The PACB vote–controlled by Assembly Speaker Silver, Senate majority Leader Bruno, and the Governor–requires unanimity for passage.

Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn intends to go to court to challenge the grossly deficient FEIS.


Completed:
WHAT'S PENDING as of September 29, 2006:
The public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has ended.

Enormous amounts of comments were submitted to the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) by scores of organizations and hundreds of individuals. Click here for links to some of these comment submissions.

Now the ESDC must review all these comments and respond to them in a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

That FEIS could legally come out as soon as October 9, 2006, but with the amount of responses submitted to ESDC that is highly unlikely. Though ESDC is clearly trying to fast-track their approval we expect that the FEIS will not be released until late October or November. But it is a sign of the continuing non-public, and non-transparent process that the public does not even receive basic information like a timeline.

Once the FEIS is released the ESDC Board will then vote to approve it which is expected to be a rubberstamp. This would include approval of eminent domain.

Then the Public Authorties Control Board (PACB)–comprised of Assembly Speaker Silver, Senate Majority Leader Bruno and the Governor will have to vote on the project.

As all of this is going on, lawsuits from the public are expected.

COMPLETED as of September 29, 2006:

Next hearings scheduled on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS):

Tuesday, September 12, 2006 – 4:30 pm – 8 pm
at the New York City College of Technology (Klitgord Auditorium)
285 Jay Street, Brooklyn
We are urging people not to attend the 9/12 hearing. Here is why

Monday, September 18, 2006 – 4:30 pm – 8 pm
at the New York City College of Technology (Klitgord Auditorium)
285 Jay Street, Brooklyn

COMMENTS TO THE ESDC MUST BE SUBMITTED BY: 
Written comments must be RECEIVED by the ESDC no later than 5:30 PM, Friday, September 22, 2006. Send your comments (delivery receipt and signature requested) to:

Atlantic Yards c/o ESDC
Empire State Develpment Corporation
633 Third Avenue
New York, NY  10017

Email your comments (delivery receipt option selected) to:
atlanticyards@empire.state.ny.us

**PLEASE NOTE:
Please Email a copy of your DEIS submissions to:
cbrookynneighborhoods@hotmail.com.
Hard copy to:
Council of Brooklyn Neighborhoods
201 Dekalb Avenue
Brooklyn, NY 11205.



THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR COMMENT ON THE DEIS ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23RD
Click here for some of the testimony submitted at the hearing.



JULY 18, 2006
The ESDC has authorized the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and the General Project Plan (GPP)

• Download the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
• Download the General Project Plan (GPP)


MAY 16, 2006
As of today, given the recent release of the Final Scope, we're waiting for a Draft Environmental Impact (EIS) statement to be issued in late May or early June by the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), which is supervising the project.

After that, there will be a time period--a few months, or possibly longer--for a hearing and for comments in response to the draft EIS, its flaws, and regarding mitigation of the potential impacts. A few months later, a Final Environmental Impact Statement will announce such mitigation or where the developer and agency conclude that no mitigation is possible. The EIS can more likely be challenged in court on the grounds of process rather than content.

The final EIS must be approved by the ESDC, and the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB) must also approve the project. The PACB is controlled by Gov. George Pataki, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver. Silver killed the proposed West Side Stadium, and the New York Observer reported that he would follow the lead of the local elected member of Assembly, Roger Green, who supports the plan. Given that the Assembly has already approved $33 million for the project, would the election of Atlantic Yards opponent Bill Batson to succeed Green (who's running for Congress) change the equation at the PACB? Unclear.

Also, given that Forest City Ratner has not and likely will not acquire all the residential and commercial property it needs to commence the project, the ESDC will move to take the property via eminent domain. A lawsuit challenging the use of eminent domain is not unlikely.

Also pending is a challenge to the ESDC's use of a lawyer who had just been working for the developer. However, the agency has hired a replacement so as not to delay the approval process.

Bruce Ratner has said he expects construction to begin in the fall--but legal challenges, as well as challenges to the environmental review process, might well delay that.

From the Final Scope

The ESDC's Final Scope of Analysis, a prelude to the Draft EIS, lays out the following actions:
At this time, it is expected that the proposed project will require the following actions:
--Adoption of the GPP [General Project Plan] by ESDC, including overrides of certain local laws (described below);
--Override by ESDC of certain aspects of the New York City Zoning Resolution, including, but not limited to, use and bulk (including height and setback, floor area, and yards), signage, and parking requirements and allowances;
--Override by ESDC of the ATURA [Atlantic Terminal Urban Renewal Area] Plan as it relates to Site 5 and Site 6A (which requires consistency with zoning);
--Override of the City Map as it relates to Pacific Street between Flatbush and 6th Avenues, 5th Avenue between Flatbush and Atlantic Avenues, and Pacific Street between Vanderbilt and Carlton Avenues;
--Acquisition of property by ESDC through negotiation or condemnation and subsequent disposition of the property (by sale or long-term lease) to the project sponsors or local development corporation;
--Approval by the Public Authorities Control Board;
--Disposition by MTA of a property interest in the rail yard to ESDC, project sponsors, or a local development corporation;
--Approval by MTA of relocated and upgraded rail yard and other transit improvements, and any related real property acquisitions by LIRR or MTA;
--Provision of state and city funding for affordable housing and other elements of the proposed project and tax exempt financing;
--Condemnation by ESDC of the City’s interest in Pacific Street and 5th Avenue (as described above); and
--Condemnation or acquisition by ESDC or disposition by the City of the City’s interest in Site 5 and other City-owned property within the project site.