City Shows Sitt Who's Boss in Coney Island

Cool

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:09 PM

Wonder if DDDB is going to protest this threatened use of Eminent Domain????

FSRG

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:13 PM

are you guys and curbed *trying* to post the exact same stories today???

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:15 PM

Does this mean that the Mermaid Parade is back?

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:16 PM

Brownstoner, we know what your feelings are about eminent domain, and we agree with you to to some degree, but in this instance we sure are glad that there is something called eminent domain to save Brooklyn from developers like Joe Sitt who could easily turn some of Brooklyn's best real estate swaths into more Fulton Street malls and big box stores. We sure are happy that we have a mayor who has the balls to save Brooklyn from more crap like that, and would encourage more use of land grabbing to this end.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:26 PM

Coney Island will be worthless once AY is built.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:27 PM

GO SITT GO!!!!!

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:38 PM

Too bad out Mayor doesn't have the balls to save Brooklyn from crap like the Atlantic Yards.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:40 PM

Mayor Bloomberg's balls will be worthless once AY is built.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:52 PM

Yeah, Coney Island is great the way it is. Keep it scummy, seedy, and grungy!

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 3:57 PM

They are not leaving it the way it is. They are just not turning it into a scuzzy cheaply built mall disguised as an amusement park.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 4:05 PM

So where will people park once the parking lot is built on? Or is KeySpan providing free jetpacks to sports fans?

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 4:51 PM

Brownstoner, if you are getting your information from Curbed, you sure are putting one hell of a different spin on the story. Seems like Sitt it is going to make a killing on the land he bought less than a year ago and get high density development rights to boot. Granted they are exposing Sitt as the hack shopping mall developer he is but he is hardly coming out of this with a losing deal.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 5:24 PM

"What's this world coming to?"

Same as it ever was.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 5:56 PM

So in that bully moment nobody will benefit
Not Sitt-CityHall-Coney-ParkGoers-Amusementlovers
NoBody!
Doctoroff dont give a dam about CI, this all is a gimick of bullying one another.
Sitt should wait out for his chance.
Dear Joe Don't Give Up !
Have the community with you and fight back.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 6:01 PM

Right on, brother! For a change, ED is used correctly! In your eye, Joe Sitt! (Meanwhile, he's wondering what BR knows that he doesn't...)

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 7:10 PM

Was is a problem for you also when the NY Times used Eminent Domain to evict all the businesses on the northeast corner of 40th St. and 8th Ave to build their new HQ office tower in Manhattan? Seems to me the public benefits in this one.

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 8:40 PM

Funny how virtually everyone loves to say taking private property by eminent domain for transfer to the benefit of other private parties, is so wrong when it comes to Atlantic Yards but

I hear an expect silence from these same people when it comes to CI.

Pure hypocrisy - what difference exists between an arena and an amusement park?

The intellectual dishonesty of AY opponents never ceases to amaze me.

FSRG

Posted by: guest at November 8, 2007 10:14 PM

So Shahn the distinguishing characteristic in your mind between appropriate ED and inappropriate ED is who comes up with the resulting plan?

Surely you cant be arguing that an amusement park (operated for profit) on prime beach front property is more of a public benefit than thousands of units of affordable housing, improved infrastructure for the LIRR, a park (of some sort) and an Arena! All on land that heretofore was mostly a pit, parking, or empty.

Look we all get it Dan Goldstein and his ilk dont want more condo's (even thought they live and profited from such housing), they dont want an arena, and they dont want development of retail and offices that will remove the gritty edge of Brooklyn that they think they need to feel 'authentic'. All I am saying is be honest about it. Stop wrapping up your agenda in some sort of bogus property rights crusade that you don't really believe in. Clearly, the propaganda isn't working and in the end even legitimate community concerns will be ignored because it gets lost in they hyperbole, dishonesty and hypocrisy of the current messengers.

FSRG

Posted by: guest at November 9, 2007 9:35 AM

3:15,

No, Brownstoner does not cross-post stories on a daily basis. That award goes to no land grab, develop don't destroy, and atlantic yards report, who constantly post the same stories.

I agree that many of the above posters are being hypocrites. They screech about eminent domain "abuse", but cheer the use of ED when it corresponds to their wishes.

Posted by: guest at November 9, 2007 9:45 AM

I am so sickened by developers who all cry the need for "affordable housing" when ever they argue for their projects. But the fact is, if they were not forced to build affordable housing into their luxury buildings they wouldn't, and that they build the absolute minimum number of affordable units required by the government into their luxury buildings. Furthermore they build nothing but crap. If Joe Sitt had a record of caring about more than making a buck perhaps the public would not be so horrified by the proposition of him taking a stab at CI. And, prey tell, what sort of crap mall is he planning on building at the Revere Sugar factory? Go away Joe!

Posted by: guest at November 9, 2007 9:56 AM

"Was is a problem for you also when the NY Times used Eminent Domain to evict all the businesses on the northeast corner of 40th St. and 8th Ave to build their new HQ office tower in Manhattan?"

I think the NY Times abuse of ED is disgusting. They didn't even offer the owners a settlement, they just used their connections in government to kick everyone out. I will never give a cent to the NY Times again.

Posted by: guest at November 9, 2007 11:01 AM

Wow, got quiet. Must be alot of NY Times subscribers here. AY does benefit the public both in Jobs of what was empty space and economy. CI will benefit the public in the same fashion. The public will have use of both facilities. What public use did teh NY Times HQ provide?

Posted by: guest at November 9, 2007 2:26 PM