Atlantic Yards: A Terrorist Attack is Not a "Reasonable Worst-Case Scenario"?

No matter how you feel about the Atlantic Yards proposal--love it, hate it or somewhere in between--there are things about the rush job done to try to get it approved as fast as humanly possible that have to give you pause. Case in point, the way the Final Environmental Impact Statement brushes off the threat of a terrorist attack. Now, we'd be the first to hope and pray that it doesn't happen, but we also understand that an arena with glass walls and a highrise of glass sitting right atop a busy transit hub at a busy intersection might be a target.

So, what does the EIS say?

Emergency scenarios such as a large-scale terrorist attack similar to the World Trade Center attack, a biological or chemical attack, or a bomb are not conisdered a reasonable worst-case scenario and are therefore outside the scope of the EIS.

Come again? For that, No Land Grab, gives the statement five of its Bogus Points. Which would make us chuckle, except for one thing: This is not a laughing matter. While there may be targets that have more "appeal" in the sick minds of those that seek to kill us, it's not hard to envision Atlantic Yards on the short list.

If a major terrorist attack is not "a reasonable worst-case scenario" for an arena atop a train and subway station with a highrise atop it and apartments nearby, what is?

You can overlook all of the impacts of Atlantic Yards that have been ignored: scale, density, pollution, congestion, shadows, etc., etc., etc., but even the most enthusiastic backer of the project should ask that officialdom hit the pause button until proper anti-terrorism and safety planning is done.

It's a no brainer.