Marty Weighs In On City's Coney Plan
In a press release yesterday, Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz released his testimony on the City’s plan for Coney Island. Here’s an excerpt: I am pleased to approve the City’s plan, along with what I view as some improvements. My recommendations can be summed up this way: Number one, add more amusements. Number two, guarantee…
In a press release yesterday, Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz released his testimony on the City’s plan for Coney Island. Here’s an excerpt:
I am pleased to approve the City’s plan, along with what I view as some improvements. My recommendations can be summed up this way: Number one, add more amusements. Number two, guarantee that famous Coney Island glitz and bling by creating a design committee to ensure awe-inspiring architecture. And finally, make sure that anything we build we build with Coney, by Coney and for Coney—that is, we must ensure that the local community gets the jobs, affordable housing, rewards and resources that come along with revitalization. The local community deserves nothing less!
Let me start with my call for more amusements. As you know, it has always been my goal to ensure Coney Island remains an amusement park. That is to say, it should not be a place for quote-unquote big-box retail. As you know, I have not agreed with the community board in allowing greater square footage for retail. Clubs—yes! Restaurants—yes! Bowling alleys—sure! Hotels—of course! Hotels are part of the Coney tradition (there was once a hotel shaped like an elephant!) but Coney Island must not become a mall. It must be an amusement park—a vibrant part of this City’s tourist economy.
Photo by the waving cat
benson- I’m not disparaging anything. And actually a number of people have tried in the past to build Coney Island up again, only to be discouraged at every turn by the city- but please don’t try to claim Joe Sitt has anything other than his own interests at heart. What he wants to do will totally change the character of Coney Island, make it much more expensive for residents of the area, and build a Las Vegas on the Atlantic- all glitz, all the time. It’s one thing to invest in Coney Island (and yes, he is putting up his own money, as Ratner did when he was buying property in the AY area, but then what? Tell me there willl be no tax abatements or breaks and no public funds sunk into this? Tell me Sitt will not take every advantage and every dime to make sure his investment is protected, even at taxpayer expense- yet somehow we never consider that aspect of these big overbaked developments. They’re grandious, and other than throwing a bone to the community, they really care nothing for that community except as its to their advantage. Sitt is not doing whats best or good for Coney Island, or the City- he’s doing what’s best for Joe Sitt and his vision of Coney Island.
And not that he shouldn’t- after all, its business. But we both know that this is hardly a case of it’s my property, I’ll do what I want- its far more complicated because whatever he does will impact thousands of other people. That’s life in the big city and he is well aware of it. But like Ratner, he thinks money gives him the right to do whatever he pleases. That’s not the reality.
All the public institutions, the publically owned lands- are funded by taxes. They belong to the public no matter how many politicians forget that or developers want to forget that.
Bxgrl;
You are engaging in pure speculation to disparage this development. As Sparafucile noted, the Oceana development in Brighton Beach is a big private development that is smack against the boardwalk. This complex was developed by a big outfit (Muss), is over 10 years old, and there has been no encroachment on the public parts of the beach.
The issue is not my taste in entertainment nor yours. The issue is that someone FINALLY, after 50 years of decline, wants to invest private capital in Coney Island, at a time when our city sorely needs it. I find it wrong that folks want to stop it because they hold onto a vision of Coney Island that is no longer viable. Why not, for once, be optimistic and assume that a developer will do some good?
Finally, with regard to entertainment for low-income folks. This city is perhaps the most hospitable in the world in that regard. How many swimming pools does the city operate? How many free public beaches and large parks are there? Does not the Brooklyn Botanical Gardens, the Aquarium and myriad other institutions have free days of admission? All of these institutions are only a subway ride away.
I think there has been a concerted movement toward giving developers of hi profile projects whatever they want- and I think AY is a case in point. The layout and economics of the areas are different- and the Meier building is on the perimeiter of the park on a residential block. Sitt’s buildings, as far as I can tell, will be right along the waterfront, and it will be a huge development. There’s been similar situations in other, albeit, smaller towns and cities where private property is so situated as to make it difficult for people to reach public beaches, and have even petitioned to privateize access (their argument being they are paying so much money).
I really don’t know the technicalities of BBP but I thought the whole brouhaha over the coops and condos was that they would be on public parkland, and the idea was to make the park self-sustaining financially.
Brooklyn Bridge Park wasn’t (and maybe still isn’t) mapped city parkland. Alienating parkland requires an act of the state legislature, and the only two examples I can think of were for the US Tennis Center and Yankee Stadium. So it’s a pretty rare phenomenon.
I’d say the chance of Sitt’s tenants getting exclusive use of a portion of the beach is the same as the chance that the residents of that Richard Meier building will be granted exclusive use of a portion of Prospect Park.
If Brighton By the Sea hasn’t privatized part of the beach, what makes you think this development would?
Sparafucile- If the Brooklyn Bridge Park can have co-op or condo buildings in the park area, with private waterfront access or club memberships, who’s to say that the residents of the luxury housing Sitt want to put up won’t also want private amenities- and get it? If Ratner can get NYC to agree to close off an entire section of Pacific St. for his project, you going to tell me with complete certainty that Sitt will never get special favors regarding the waterfront? remembering that waterfront property is so highly desireable?
I think Marty is mostly a clown (in the nicest sense — makes people laugh, cheers them up) but I actually agree with everything he said here.
While I don’t think CI is perfect the way it is, I think it is pretty great. The whole family looks forward to a trip or two out there every summer and we are in the company of ten of thousands when we go.
It would be a shame if it became a mall. Or worse still a casino (just waiting for the economy to get bad enough for someone to push this through here — looks like it will happen in Hawaii, such a shame)
benson- no one said anything about eminent domain and Joe Sitt bought the land understanding full well what would be involved in terms of zoning, aprrovals and such. I can’t weep too much for him and his idea of Trumpifying CI is stupid. Trump and Las Vegas and Disney world may be your taste but to hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers, we just want a place to enjoy in the summer without having saccharine perky fake Snow Whites and Mickey Mouses in foam rubber suits chirping through the streets and eating a hot dog that doesn’t run you $8.00 without the sauerkraut.
If Joe Sitt wanted to really make money, he should have gone with a venue that would be less controversial and in a less iconic spot. Like it or not, Coney Island is a landmark and holds a place in hearts and minds. Ferlinghetti, Baldwin, Paul Cadmus, george Tooker – a slew of artists and photographers are all testament to Coney Island.
“the majority of NYers who can’t afford pricey entertainment would lose one of the few palces they can go to enjoy the sun and the water.”
How would Joe Sitt do that? Is he going to have a giant disk that blocks out the sun like Mr. Burns in the Simpsons?
The boardwalk and beach are mapped parkland. They’re not going anywhere even if the remaining privately-owned amusement areas vanish.
11214, I am with you! Let’s go back to New Amsterdam (or just Manahachtanienk (place of general inebriation – LOVE that!) and Breukelen!