City's Coney Plan Approved, Deal With Sitt Near
As expected, the City Council approved the Bloomberg administration’s plans for the rezoning and redevelopment of Coney Island yesterday afternoon, and reports surfaced that the City was close to reaching a deal with its long-time nemesis in the area, Joe Sitt. The Council voted 44-2 in favor of the plan, with only Tony Avella of…
As expected, the City Council approved the Bloomberg administration’s plans for the rezoning and redevelopment of Coney Island yesterday afternoon, and reports surfaced that the City was close to reaching a deal with its long-time nemesis in the area, Joe Sitt. The Council voted 44-2 in favor of the plan, with only Tony Avella of Queens and Charles Barron of Brooklyn opposing it. The deal with Sitt is more interesting. According to The Times, the city would buy six of the ten acress Sitt’s company Thor Equities owns in the footprint, leaving him four acres on Stillwell and Surf Avenues for him to develop; no word on price. Needless to say, the group Save Coney Island wasn’t very pleased with the Council’s vote: This is a sad day for New York City,” said spokesman Juan Rivero. “As a result of this rezoning, people across the city and around the world who love Coney Island could see its historic amusement district shrunk, covered up and blocked off with high-rises, its history destroyed and its potential squandered — all for nothing.”
Council Approves Deal to Upgrade Coney Island [NY Times]
Bloomberg’s Coney Island Plan Passes City Council [NY Daily News]
Council Approves Coney Plan [NY Post]
Photo by John Chevier
I agree with Goldie. Throw those people out. I live in a coop in a good neighborhood and have a great view from the 6th (top) floor. If a developer wants to throw us all out and build 20 stories and then another throws all of the the new owners out and builds 40 stories, so be it. And, according to the Supreme Court that’s perfectly fine – it’s all to the public good. Let the market (the mayor and the developers) decide (oops maybe that hasn’t worked out too well recently.)
> what a wuss, snark!
I confess, I’m a wuss. But it really felt like I was going to be flung out of that thing.
> one plays cheesy old heavy metal and one plays disco
I was on one that played hiphop and disco, punctuated by airhorn blasts.
“Try the Cyclone 3 times after a big lunch. :-)”
Said big lunch consisting of Nathan’s frogs legs, of course.
i LOVE the hymalaya. there’s two there right? or two very similar ones? i know one plays cheesy old heavy metal and one plays disco or something hahaha.
*rob*
what a wuss, snark! Try the Cyclone 3 times after a big lunch. 🙂
I got talked into going out to Coney Island last weekend by a friend who had never been.
Then – against my better judgment – I let her talk me into riding the Himalaya.
Holy whiplash, Batman, never again…
“Coney Island could see its historic amusement district shrunk”
This is such utter nonsense. The amount of land set aside under this plan for open amusements is far, far larger than the actual area devoted to those uses currently. For the last nearly 50 years, Coney Island has had C7 zoning that precludes pretty much everything EXCEPT amusements, and this zoning protection has coincided with a steady decline. People have this fantasy that there’s some unmet demand for these uses that will suddenly appear from nowhere and inspire businesses to flock to the area to build more rides.
santa monica is not NYC. And it’s not ok to shove people around based on who you think pays more taxes. Coney Island was called the “working man’s Riviera” – the rich didn’t have much interest. Now they do? So what? Why should they feel entitled to every place and every amenity, and why should the rest of us have less rights?
what is exactly is crime ridden on coney island? im talking mostly the amusement district and beaches. it’s always seemed pretty safe to me.
*rob*