Save the Coney Island Boardwalk! — Brooklynian

Save the Coney Island Boardwalk!

Tell New York City’s Parks Department not to destroy one of New York’s authentic jewels, the world-famous Coney Island Boardwalk! If the Parks Department has its way, the Boardwalk will be turned into a concrete sidewalk! The New York City Design Committee will meet on this issue on January 30th, so there's not much time. We need your help today!

Here's what you can do:

1. Sign this petition at

Please visit the site again EVEN IF YOU THINK YOU HAVE ALREADY SIGNED, because many signatures were not recorded, due to a glitch in the system.

If you see a blue phrase "Inside U.S.," you MUST click on this before signing. You'll know your signature has gone through when you see a page that says, "Thanks for signing."

2. If you have the time and you don't happen to be working that day, please set aside Monday, January 30th and join a group of concerned citizens at the next New York City Design Commission meeting. Here's how it works: each person who shows up gets three minutes (and only three minutes) to speak to the Commission. The more people who show up, the more time we get. The meeting time hasn't been set yet, but the last one was in the late morning. It will definitely be during business hours. If you can show up, please reply to this post.



  • An important update:

    Hi Friends- I just received an e-mail from the Parks Department's liaison to the Design Commission informing me that they have postponed the date that they intend to present their proposal to the Design Commission.

    They will not present on January 30th, as we were originally told, but have tentatively rescheduled for February 21st.

    We'll know if this date is confirmed and definite in the coming few weeks, and I will then inform you of the new date and time. Please SAVE THE DATE, so that if it is confirmed we can all once again be sure to be there!

    I know that we were all geared up and ready to go on the 30th, but let's not let this delay deter us. Instead, let's redouble our focus and determination, use the time to get others to join with us, get more people to sign our on-line petition, and remain committed more than ever to our goal of a boardwalk free of concrete! As soon as I have more info I'll send it along.

    This Saturday, January 28th, I will be holding an important informational meeting regarding the fate of the Boardwalk. We will discuss exactly what has been done so far, what the Parks Department's proposal is currently and long term, what our efforts have been thus far, and what we can all do right now to have a desirable outcome!

    It will take place at 3PM, for one hour, at the Brighton Beach Library,16 Brighton 1st. Road. It's around the corner from the Ocean Parkway Q line subway stop. If you are in the five boroughs or in the greater New York area, please come! It's only by doing the small bit that each of us can, that our cumulative effect can be great!

    Send me an e-mail to let me know if you are attending. I would like to have an idea of how many of us will show up, as I will be distributing some informational materials.

    Thanks for caring-if we don't, who will?


  • Now that the Design Commission meeting has been delayed, we have more time to add signatures to our petition. We've almost reached 1,000 signatures! Sign today, and share with your friends and family:

  • The Parks Department delayed their presentation to the Design Commission for the second time. The fight to save the Coney Island Boardwalk is not over! In fact, it's just heating up...

  • I attended the hearing on the was a fiasco! Judge Solomon, as expected came down in favor of Parks & Rec.

    I have been waiting for the Plaintiffs'attorneys to file an appeal.

    That it has yet to filed is a puzzle! Given, what I believe to

    be the key point in his so outrageously 'slanted'

    in favor of the city, I think an appeal is highly winnable.

    To wit:

    "Solomon ruled late last week that the project does not need such a review, comparing it to changing an athletic field to artificial turf."

    While, in large part...he based his ruling on this claim:

    Petitioners’ Contentions

    The petitioners contend that respondent’s plans to replace the Riegelmann Boardwalk are subject to environmental review pursuant to the Environmental Quality Review Act (Environmental Conservation Law §8-0101, et seq. - “SEQRA”) together with Title 6 of the New York Code, Rules and Regulations (6 N.Y.C.R.R. §617, et seq.); and the New York City Environmental Quality Review (Executive Order 91 and Title 62 of the Rules of the City of New York 62 R.C.N.Y. §5-01, et seq. - collectively “CEQR”).

    Further, the petitioners are concerned that the Riegelmann Boardwalk project is one part of a long range plan to replace the entire boardwalk (approximately one million square feet) with recycled plastic lumber and concrete. This alleged long range plan is of great concern to the petitioners for two reasons. First, the Riegelmann Boardwalk and Coney Island Beach are enduring symbols of New York City and the famous Coney Island. Second, petitioners contend that respondent failed to take into consideration the environmental impact on this coastal area.

    Therefore, respondent arbitrarily and capriciously decided to first, classify the Riegelmann Boardwalk project as one not subject to environmental review, and second, not conduct a review of the aesthetic impact of recycled plastic lumber and concrete.

    Respondents’ Contentions

    The respondent argues that an environmental review was not necessary since the Riegelmann Boardwalk Project only involves maintenance or repair involving no substantial changes to an existing structure or facility and/or the replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility on the same site. As such, the project comes within the several exemptions from environmental review.

    Respondents also argue that an injunction should not be issued since petitioners cannot meet the necessary criteria. First, they cannot establish a likelihood on the merits since the petition is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Second, there is an absence of imminent or irreparable harm. Third, equity dictates if the project is delayed, Parks will need to relinquish the grant money in the amount of $7,400,000.00 for the rehabilitation of the deteriorating boardwalk. Moreover, the petitioners’ alleged atheistic harm is outweighed by the environmental impact of deforestation."

    It's all about the money!

  • As a follow-up...

    I just took a quick look at Solomons' "natural - to - artificial turf " statement. It reads:

    "In his ruling, he said the changes were similar to replacing an athletic field with artificial turf, which is not subject to environmental review."

    •"Some artificial turf requires infill such as silicon sand and/or granulated rubber. Some granulated rubber is made from recycled car tires and may carry heavy metals which can leach into the water table. Alternative sources of infill may provide a safer solution.

    •There is some evidence that periodic disinfection of artificial turf is required as pathogens are not broken down by natural processes in the same manner as natural grass. Despite this, a 2006 study suggests certain microbial life is less active in artificial turf

    •Artificial turf tends to retain heat from the sun and can be much hotter than natural grass with prolonged exposure to the sun."

    Source: Wikipedia

    Sounds like it should require an environmental review!

This discussion has been closed.