Court refuses to halt destruction of 377 mature trees. After the City approved the New York Yankees’ plan to construct a new stadium, Save Our Parks, a group of over 100 Bronx residents, filed an article 78 petition challenging the final environmental review and sought an immediate injunction to stop the Yankees’ plan to remove 377 mature trees.
Court refuses to halt destruction of 377 mature trees. After the City approved the New York Yankees’ plan to construct a new stadium, Save Our Parks, a group of over 100 Bronx residents, filed an article 78 petition challenging the final environmental review and sought an immediate injunction to stop the Yankees’ plan to remove 377 mature trees.
Save Our Parks claimed that the environmental review failed to consider the possible reconstruction of the existing stadium, the impact on Bronx school children of the park space lost during construction, and the loss of shade due to the Yankees plan to remove 377 trees, some over 40 years old. Save Our Parks claimed it would suffer irreversible harm if the Yankees removed the mature trees.
With the bond sale for the stadium set for August 16, 2006, the Yankees and the City argued that, if the court issued the injunction, the bond sale would be at risk, the construction period would be extended and construction costs increased. The City and the Yankees asked the court to dismiss the entire claim, arguing that its environmental review was sufficient.
Justice Cahn denied the injunction, ruling that it was unlikely that Save Our Parks would be successful. The study considered a sufficient number of alternative projects, rejected expansion of the existing stadium and considered the impact of lost park space on the community as a whole, which necessarily included Bronx school children. Noting that the trees themselves had no legal protection, the court found that the tree replacement plan was suitable.
The court found that the Yankees would suffer greater harm since the construction delay could be great, but it denied the motion to dismiss since the City had not yet provided all its documents to Save Our Parks for review.
Save Our Parks v. City Planning, Index No. 11083/06, Aug. 15, 2006 (N.Y. Cty.Sup.Ct.) (Cahn, J.).