We’ll use this page to keep everyone informed about ESPC’s lawsuits.
Filings
As of July 15, 2024, ESPC and others have filed five lawsuits: The Highway Removal Case, The Climate Case, The EIS Case, The NYCLU Case and The Federal Case.
The Highway Removal Case
The first hearing for this case will be held November 8, 2024.
The East Side Parkways Coalition and over 60 individual plaintiffs have filed a lawsuit against the New York State Department of Transportation (DOTNYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation), claiming violations of their constitutional rights to clean air and a healthy environment under New York State’s “Green AmendmentThe Green Amendment Section 19 of Article I of the New York State Constitution, the “Green Amendment” says, “Each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and to a healthful environment”. It provides consitutional protection for environmental rights, ensuring every person in New York has the right to a clean and healthful environment..” The plaintiffs allege the DOT’s construction, maintenance, and operation of a heavily trafficked expressway through the East Side of Buffalo—a disadvantaged community suffering from significant health issues—has resulted in an unhealthful environment.
The lawsuit contends the expressway was constructed on public parkland without the necessary legislative approval, violating the Public Trust DoctrinePublic Trust Doctrine Certain natural and cultural resources are preserved for public use. Under this doctrine, the government is required to protect and maintain these resources for the public’s reasonable use. In the context of the Route 33 project, the cultural resouce is the original Olmsted-designed Humboldt Parkway. ESPC contends the State of New York violated this principle by taking the parkland to use as a highway without the express permission of the NYS Legislature.. The plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment to restore the parkland to its original state and an injunction to prohibit further maintenance or reconstruction of the expressway.
Read the filing online here.
Title: ESPC v NYS, DOT, Buffalo
Index Number: 808572/2024
Date Filed: 6/13/2024
The Climate Case
The lawsuit initiated by the Western New York Youth Climate CouncilWestern New York Youth Climate Council (WNYYCC) Definition to come. (WNYYCCWestern New York Youth Climate Council (WNYYCC) Definition to come.), Coalition for Economic Justice (CEJ), and Citizens for Regional Transit (CRT) against the New York State Department of Transportation challenges the agency’s Determination of No Significant EffectFinding of No Significant Impact A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision document which briefly describes why the project will not have any significant environmental effect. This determination is based on the analysis contained in an Environmental Assessment (EA) (Part 1, Chapter 6, Environmental Assessment). If an EA determines that there are significant impacts, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be the appropriate Class of Action. (DONSEFinding of No Significant Impact A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decision document which briefly describes why the project will not have any significant environmental effect. This determination is based on the analysis contained in an Environmental Assessment (EA) (Part 1, Chapter 6, Environmental Assessment). If an EA determines that there are significant impacts, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be the appropriate Class of Action.) concerning a proposed project. The plaintiffs argue the DONSE violates several legal mandates, including the State Environmental Quality Review ActSEQR SEQR requires all local, regional, and state government agencies to equally examine the environmental impacts along with the social and economic considerations for a certain project, or action, during their discretionary review. Agencies must follow the multi-step SEQR Decision Process, which requires them to assess the environmental significance of all actions they have the power to approve, fund, or directly assume. If an action consists of multiple phases, sets of activities, or if separate agencies are involved, SEQR requires agencies jointly consider these cumulative impacts during their review. Segmentation of an action into smaller components for an individual review contradicts the intent of the law and may result in legal action. (SEQRASEQR SEQR requires all local, regional, and state government agencies to equally examine the environmental impacts along with the social and economic considerations for a certain project, or action, during their discretionary review. Agencies must follow the multi-step SEQR Decision Process, which requires them to assess the environmental significance of all actions they have the power to approve, fund, or directly assume. If an action consists of multiple phases, sets of activities, or if separate agencies are involved, SEQR requires agencies jointly consider these cumulative impacts during their review. Segmentation of an action into smaller components for an individual review contradicts the intent of the law and may result in legal action.) and the Climate Leadership and Community Protection ActClimate Leadership and Community Protection Act, also known as CLCPA. The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) is a plan signed into law on July 18, 2019[1] to address climate change and reach net zero emissions in New York State. (CLCPA). They claim the NYSDOTNYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation failed to adequately assess the project’s environmental impacts, particularly its contributions to climate change and its effects on disadvantaged communities.
The lawsuit seeks to annul the DONSE, compel the preparation of an Environmental Impact StatementEnvironmental Impact Statement An environmental impact statement (EIS), under United States environmental law, is a document required by the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for certain actions "significantly affecting the quality of the human environment".[1] An EIS is a tool for decision making. It describes the positive and negative environmental effects of a proposed action, and it usually also lists one or more alternative actions that may be chosen instead of the action described in the EIS. (Wikipedia) (EISEnvironmental Impact Statement An environmental impact statement (EIS), under United States environmental law, is a document required by the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for certain actions "significantly affecting the quality of the human environment".[1] An EIS is a tool for decision making. It describes the positive and negative environmental effects of a proposed action, and it usually also lists one or more alternative actions that may be chosen instead of the action described in the EIS. (Wikipedia)), and enforce compliance with the CLCPA and the constitutional right to a healthful environment. The plaintiffs also request the court to award attorney fees and other costs incurred during the litigation.
Read the filing online here.
Title: Western New York Youth Climate Council (WNYYCC) v DOT
Index Number: 808662/2024
Date Filed: 6/14/2024
The EIS Case and the NYCLUNYCLU New York Civil Liberties Union The NYCLU is the state affiliate of the ACLU. We fight for a New York where everyone lives with dignity, liberty, justice, and equality. We advance civil rights and civil liberties through an expert mix of litigation, policy advocacy, field organizing, and strategic communications. Our work is informed by the insights of our communities and coalitions, and is powered by our supporters. Case
The EIS and NYCLU cases seek to revoke the DOT decision to proceed based on several claims, including the decision not to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement.
EIS
This lawsuit seeks to annul the decision by the New York State Department of Transportation to issue a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act for the $1 billion + reconstruction project of the NYS Route 33 Kensington Expressway in Buffalo. Petitioners argue NYSDOT’s environmental review was flawed, failing to adequately address impacts on noise, vibration, traffic, and air quality in a densely populated, disadvantaged community already burdened by high levels of respiratory illnesses.
This case demands NYSDOT adhere to standard procedure, rather than push through this hastily rushed proposal. Plaintiffs contend the review process did not meet SEQRA’s requirements, was arbitrary and capricious, and violated both state regulations and the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act . The lawsuit highlights deficiencies in assessing the project’s environmental impacts and calls for a more thorough review to mitigate adverse effects on the affected community.
Read the filing online here. [coming soon]
Title: ESPC v DOT
Index Number: 808702/2024
Date Filed: 6/14/2024
NYCLU
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) is suing the New York State Department of Transportation over the redevelopment of the Kensington Expressway. The NYCLU claims NYSDOT’s Environmental Assessment for the project was inadequate and failed to take a comprehensive look at the potential environmental hazards. Specifically, the EAEA Environmental Assessment underestimated the impact of particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions, which are known to pose significant health risks. The lawsuit highlights that the Humboldt Park neighborhood, which is already disadvantaged and bears high levels of pollution, would be further negatively impacted by the project.
The NYCLU argues a full Environmental Impact Statement should have been conducted to thoroughly evaluate the environmental, social, and economic impacts and to ensure proper mitigation measures are identified. The NYCLU is seeking judicial intervention to compel NYSDOT to comply with state laws designed to protect vulnerable communities from environmental harm.
Read the filing online here. [coming soon]
Title: Harris v DOT
Index Number: 808703/2024
Date Filed: 6/14/2024
The Federal Case
The lawsuit, East Side Parkways Coalition v. Federal Highway Administration, involves multiple plaintiffs, including the East Side Parkways Coalition, Western New York Youth Climate Council, Citizens for Regional Transit, as well as several individuals residing in Buffalo, New York. They are suing the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), its administrators, and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) for failing to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Department of Transportation Act (DOTA).
The plaintiffs argue the proposed reconstruction of the Kensington Expressway, which initially destroyed Humboldt Parkway, will further harm the local community through increased noise, dust, vibrations, and harmful air quality. They assert the FHWA and NYSDOT did not adequately consider the environmental and historical impacts of the project, nor did they explore feasible alternatives that would minimize harm to the community and preserve the historic nature of the area. The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to halt the project until proper environmental reviews and considerations are conducted.
Read the filing online here. [coming soon]
Title: ESP v FHAFHA Federal Highway Administration
Case 1:24-cv-00665
Date Filed: 7/15/2024
Timeline & Calendar
First court date for the Article 78 Proceedings
November 8, 2024, 10:30am
NY State Supreme Court
(location to follow)
Buffalo NY 14202
Other Documents
Stipulated Scheduling Order
This document sets deadlines for replies for all the cases.