|
Pols
call for city review of Ratner’s arena
By Jess Wisloski
The Brooklyn Papers
Taking their first unified stance on developer Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic
Yards plan, a delegation of City Council members from Brooklyn gathered
on the steps of City Hall to call for a city-level review of the basketball
arena, housing and office skyscraper project.
Councilwoman Letitia James, who represents the Prospect Heights neighborhood
in which the 21-acre project would be built, led the brief press conference.
James has spearheaded opposition to the state-sponsored process by which
Ratner plans to build a 19,000-seat arena and 17 residential and commercial
high-rises emanating from the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues.
The project depends upon the state’s condemnation of up to 10 acres
of private property as well as the purchase of development rights to build
over Metropolitan Transportation Authority rail yards.
The Empire State Development Corporation, which is partnering with Ratner
to build the project is also responsible for oversight of the state environmental
review process the project will face, which is widely considered less
stringent than the city’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP).
James was joined by fellow Brooklyn council members David Yassky (Downtown,
Boerum Hill and Brooklyn Heights), Diana Reyna (Williamsburg and Bushwick),
Albert Vann (Bedford-Stuyvesant and Crown Heights) and Charles Barron
(East New York, Brownsville, Canarsie and East Flatbush).
Sara Gonzalez, of Red Hook and Sunset Park, was unable to attend, due
to “an emergency in her district” said James.
The April 12 press conference was spurred by the recent release of a Memorandum
of Understanding between the city, state and Ratner, which stipulated
a $100 million commitment from the city towards the costs of the project’s
predevelopment, as well as the sale of four city street-beds and two city
lots to the developer for $1.
Ratner hopes to bring the New Jersey Nets basketball team, which he purchased
last summer, to an arena at Atlantic and Flatbush avenues in time for
the 2007-08 season.
“Brooklyn deserves its own team, but it must be approved by the people
who live there,” said Yassky. “Surely, a proposal that they
are confident is good for Brooklyn should survive public scrutiny.”
Said James, “The potential impact of this project necessitates oversight
by the council and full implementation of the ULURP process.”
James added that letters urging that the largest development in Brooklyn
in three decades be subject to ULURP, were issued to Gov. George Pataki
and Mayor Michael Bloomberg in September by Community Board 2 (Brooklyn
Heights, Downtown Brooklyn, Boerum Hill, Fort Greene and Clinton Hill),
CB6 (Park Slope, Gowanus, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens and Red Hook) and
CB8 (Prospect Heights, Crown Heights and Weeksville).
Attached to the press release distributed by James were fliers by the
anti-arena group, Develop-Don’t Destroy Brooklyn.
One handout, titled “Anatomy of a Sweetheart Deal: Public Subsidies
and MOU for Dummies for Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards Proposal,”
noted the project would feature 17 high-rise buildings between 16 and
53 stories tall on a development site “nearly 1.5 times the size
of the World Trade Center footprint.”
But while opponents were not on hand, project proponents were present,
namely three members of Brooklyn United for Innovative Local Development
(BUILD), a group that has worked in consort with Forest City Ratner on
a privately negotiated “community benefits agreement” to secure
local hiring and business contracts to the surrounding area.
“The issue of having some public review process is important,”
said Marie Louis, vice president of BUILD. “We don’t understand
why these folks think the state process is any less valid than a city
review process. It’s really just an attempt to sustain opposition
to the project.”
The group formed after the arena plans were announced as a community organization
to help nearby residents find work in the new developments.
“There is no real justified or legitimate reasons for opposing the
project,” Louis said.
According to the James press release, the State Environmental Quality
Review Act (SEQRA) is “‘self-enforcing’ and is not overseen
by the state Legislature. The City Council also plays no role in the SEQRA
process,” the release read.
Vann said he has not yet taken a stance on the project’s merits or
downfalls, but feels any development could benefit from ULURP.
“I believe that any project that involves large numbers of people
should have review,” he said. “There are those who are for the
project, who support it, and a ULURP is a valid process whether you are
for or against a project.
“Whether or not a project goes forward it should be reviewed by the
people and have their input.”
|
