Updated, 3:43 p.m. | A state court ruled on Thursday that the state could not use eminent domain on behalf of Columbia University to obtain parts of a 17-acre site in West Harlem, dealing a major blow to the university’s plans to build a $6.3 billion satellite campus.
In a 3-to-2 decision, the Appellate Division of the State Supreme Court annulled the state’s 2008 decision to take property for the expansion project [pdf], saying that its condemnation procedure was unconstitutional.
Columbia embarked on its first major expansion in 75 years in 2003, saying it had outgrown its cramped Morningside Heights campus. It planned to replace the low-scale industrial buildings north of 125th Street with school buildings, laboratories, restaurants, a jazz club and tree-lined streets.
The court’s decision is not fatal to to its expansion plan. It already owns or controls 91 percent of the 17-acres–61 of 67 buildings–in the project area. It can simply build around the other property owners, or come to some sort of agreement. But the state and the university had always sought the entire site.
It bought most of the land between 125th Street and 133rd Street, between Broadway and Riverside Drive. But the university failed to work out a deal with Nicholas Sprayregen, who owned four Tuck-it-Away Self Storage buildings in the area, and the Singh family, who own two gas stations. At one point, Mr. Sprayregan offered to swap his properties for other land owned by Columbia nearby, but Columbia refused to do a deal. He said the state never came to him asking to work out a solution.
“I feel unbelievable,” Mr. Sprayregen said following Thursday’s decision. “I was always cautiously optimistic. But I was aware we were going againt 50 tears of unfair cases against property owners.”
He and the Singh family challenged the state’s finding that the neighborhood was blighted and its decision to condemn property in the project area on behalf of the university.
Warner Johnston, a spokesman for the Empire State Development Corporation, criticized the court decision as “wrong and inconsistent with established law.”
He added, “E.S.D.C. intends to appeal this decision.”
The decision comes less than two weeks after the Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, ruled 6-to-1 that the state could exercise eminent domain in taking businesses, public property and private homes on behalf of a Brooklyn developer who planned a 22-acre residential development and a basketball arena.
Norman Siegel, a lawyer for the property owners who opposed the use of eminent domain on behalf of Columbia, called the court’s decision a “major victory” in a state that has been very deferential to the state’s power to take private property. He said the ruling establishes “a road map for how property owners can fight these battles.”
Columbia, which had touched off a major community battle in 1968 when it tried unsuccessfully to expand into Morningside Park, had hoped to avoid a similar battle this time around. It chose a neighborhood consisting mainly of small businesses, warehouses and little housing. Although state and city officials approved Columbia’s plans, some residents opposed it and several business owners chose to fight in court and refused to sell to Columbia.
For his part, Mr. Sprayregan said he never opposed Columbia’s expansion plan. “The research and education they will perform are very beneficial,” he said. “The fact remains that even if they don’t get the last five percent they can still go ahead and build their campus.”
New York Post: was clearly too busy with Photoshop and did not read Spencer Morgan’s piece in the Observer yesterday, or they would realize that 
