This Must be Stopped! Astroland Closing?

friendlypitbull · November 2006

LeeHo wrote: I think all of this talk about the physical stuctures that exist on the property is futile because that is not even the tip of the iceberg. Coney Island is really symbolic in the same way that Tom's on Washington is symbolic of a bygone era in the city. Actually Coney Island attractions have weathered a lot. Fires, fluctuating attendence, neglect, etc. The socio-cultural significance of the place is irrefutable. There may be other places like it, but it was the first and it shouldn't be forgotten.

What is bygone about Beaches, Amusments and a Boardwalk? and what in the new plan is so inconsistent with that? Astroland wasnt the 1st amusment park in CI so why should it be the last?

Unless when you say the 'socio-cultural significance' you are referring to decay, poverty and irrelevance - in which case I must ask; is that really worth "preserving" - couldnt we just have a museum?

alafairnadia · November 2006

there's absolutely no way they could pull off a bellagio-like hotel out there. first off, if I want to go to the bellagio, I'm going to the bellagio. if I want to gamble, I'm going somewhere with more than one casino. if I want the beach and gambling, I already have a ton of options, including non-coastal vegas ... the mandalay bay.

and honestly, atlantic city is close enough - do we really need a sleazy wannabe-vegas half an hour away on the Q?

friendlypitbull · November 2006

erikka wrote:
I've always loved CI and definitely think a revamp was in order (and that seems to be the general direction things have been taking). If I wanted clean, sanitized family-safe "fun" I'd go to six flags.

But isnt that actually the history of CI - clean safe family fun? I thought CI was built as a place for families who couldnt go to the Hamptons? Does urban decay and honkey-tonk anmosphere really need preservation?

erikka wrote: Thor Equities sucks. Ever visit their "successful" development on Fulton Mall. Not doing so well. They'll just probably throw up some more chain stores like they have in other "urban" (ahem, ghetto) neighborhoods and pat themselves on the back. http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/040816/16eespotlight.htm

Yeah that article paints him out to be a real a$$hole - guy wants to bring quality retail to the underserved and formerly ignored urban population. What a jerk. And Thor didnt 'develop' the Gallery at Fulton, they bought it and currently anyway there is virtually no major chains and btw - it isn't considered successfull on any (economic or retailing) basis

erikka wrote: God, look at this shit: http://nymag.com/nymetro/realestate/features/14498/index.html
Is that Vegas or Brooklyn? I would gladly take dollar stores and carmel apples over that eyesore.

Actually CI essentially is old time Vegas and Atlantic City, just w/o the gambling (which it used to have). So if you wanted to continue the CI tradition, Vegas would be historically accurate.

erikka · November 2006

[quote="friendlypitbull"]

But isnt that actually the history of CI - clean safe family fun? I thought CI was built as a place for families who couldnt go to the Hamptons? Does urban decay and honkey-tonk anmosphere really need preservation?

Yeah that article paints him out to be a real a$$hole - guy wants to bring quality retail to the underserved and formerly ignored urban population. What a jerk. And Thor didnt 'develop' the Gallery at Fulton, they bought it and currently anyway there is virtually no major chains and btw - it isn't considered successfull on any (economic or retailing) basis

CI has never been family friendly--watch the Burns documentary where historians refer to it as "sodom by the sea". It's one of the last places in NYC where you can drink in public and eat fried food with abandon. I like that.

You don't consider forever 21 to be a major chain? They're at Thor's space in Fulton Mall. While I am not anti-gentrification, I am anti-mall and this Sitt fellow just seems like another Ratner with better PR people. Given how unsuccessful the baseball stadium has been thus far he's got his work cut out for him.

I'm curious how you can compare CI to Vegas. Both have rich histories but I'm not seeing parallels.

friendlypitbull · November 2006

Actually CI started off as a playground for the rich and had both 'luxury hotels' and amusment parks and beaches for families as well as other areas which were more 'adult' like gambling, horse racing, showgirls, etc...;
CI also always had an 'over the top' aspect to it w/ and Thor Equities plan is sort of reminisent of Samuel Friede' Globe Tower of 100yrs ago. Which btw is all very Vegas (circa today)

The image of teeming masses (family and otherwise) really only happened later when the Subways were completed and the Beaches were opened to the public (1920's). Then after WWII CI began to decline and essentially thats what it is today - a relic of its history, not a preservation of it.

The Baseball Stadium BTW is wildly successful - they had to add 1000 seats after it opened and they sell out almost every game.

Finally I am sure they'll have plenty of fried foods and alchol at a redone CI.

raw · December 2006

Subject: Re: This Must be Stopped! Astroland Closing?

LeeHo wrote: What the fuck?

I just gotta say how great it is to see Poppa Smurf's icon next to "What the fuck?"

leeho · December 2006

But the teeming masses and the completion of the subways is what Coney Island is known and respected for.

I'm at a loss as to what the real point of demolishing and building an indoor water park/condos can really do for the place that would make it any better than it is now.

I understand that the origin of Coney Island, at first, wasn't intended for "the masses." That is clear. But, what it turned into upon completion of viable transportation was for the masses and it still is.

I don't know where you can experience anything like Coney Island except at Coney Island.

Can you tell me another place that still has a freak show next to the ocean?

That has a World Fair Attraction that still operates and scares you simply cuz of its age?

That has Brooklyn accents taunting you to shoot a baloon and you do?

That has a water flume with algae all over it?

That has a bar with shit from 1919 to look at on the walls and it actually comes from the same place?

That allows an underage teddy bear to drink cognac?

That sells an expensive hot dog simply because it is the origin of that particular brand's stand next to the ocean?

That was ravaged by many fires and continued to operate?

That was the backdrop for one of the greatest cult films of 1979?

Wildwood? Nah? Too new and too Jersey.

Ashbury? Ooops, torn down and now considered a mistake in doing so.

Atlantic City? Different and beautiful in its own way.

Preserving something like Coney Island is important.

friendlypitbull · December 2006

LeeHo wrote: But the teeming masses and the completion of the subways is what Coney Island is known and respected for.

I'm at a loss as to what the real point of demolishing and building an indoor water park/condos can really do for the place that would make it any better than it is now.

I understand that the origin of Coney Island, at first, wasn't intended for "the masses." That is clear. But, what it turned into upon completion of viable transportation was for the masses and it still is.

I don't know where you can experience anything like Coney Island except at Coney Island.

Can you tell me another place that still has a freak show next to the ocean?

Freak show to be preserved

LeeHo wrote: That has a World Fair Attraction that still operates and scares you simply cuz of its age?

Wonder Wheel, Cyclone and Parachutte Jump all to be preserved

LeeHo wrote: That has Brooklyn accents taunting you to shoot a baloon and you do?

Some attractions to be retained - People in Brookly often have an accent

LeeHo wrote: That has a water flume with algae all over it?

There will be a water park - doubt the algea will be retained

LeeHo wrote: That has a bar with shit from 1919 to look at on the walls and it actually comes from the same place?

I havent seen the shit but many places have shitty bars

LeeHo wrote: That allows an underage teddy bear to drink cognac?

Dont know about this but Bears shouldnt drink anyway

LeeHo wrote: That sells an expensive hot dog simply because it is the origin of that particular brand's stand next to the ocean?

Nathans to be preserved

LeeHo wrote: That was ravaged by many fires and continued to operate?

Actually every amusment park from the era you speak went out of buisness - Astroland dates to around 1960

"LeeHo" wrote: That was the backdrop for one of the greatest cult films of 1979?
"
Coney Island will still be there and you can still say "warriers come out to play" every time you "bop your way back to Coney" , and when you see the sea you can still think your "home" but if you are talking about retaining the look from the movie - well then I guess your advocating Graffitti on every train and subway station too, which I'm not sure anyone except Cyrus really wants.

[quote=LeeHo]Preserving something like Coney Island is important.

Preserving aspects of its history is 1 thing but picking one moment in history that you like (b/c I assure you many people like the CI circa 1900) and trying to freeze an entire section of city in that time, is not fair to the city or the residents who might not appreciate your view of urban cool.

leeho · December 2006

Who is still living from Coney Island in 1900? What photos are from 1900 that make us think of the place now? It's awesome that you like Coney Island in 1900, but that is not the collective memory of the place, nor is it the historical representation to most people.

Thanks for going through the list. That must have taken some time to do all of that quoting. You didn't answer the most IMPORTANT part of the question, which is the collective question: Where else can you experience all of those things at one time?

Nowhere but Coney Island.

If you want "blandness by the sea" then you are boring as all hell.

Save your pro-development shit for somewhere else. Do you even venture out there all that often? I'm guessing you don't, or you love sterile environs that lack character.

friendlypitbull · December 2006

LeeHO I dont know why you have to get personal, possibly b/c you cant argue the merits of you position in an intellectual way, while it may reflect that your cognitive abilites are not up to the task, it more likely reflects that your position isnt sound.

As to where you can experience what you cite - while I havent sampled all the seaside amusment parks/towns in the world, you certainly can experience them in CI and based on the current plans anyway - you will still be able to experience all of them at CI (except for maybe animal cruelty and dirty log flume water) .

Sorry that you find vibrant communities boring, maybe you can find another area and its residents willing to live with continued delapidation, economic stagnation and poor amenities so as to provide you with the 'exciting' urban experience you so crave to VISIT.

queencallipygos · December 2006

Nathan wrote: The amusements at Coney Island were not built by some altruistic fairy-godmother to provide a place for poor Manhattanites to play; they were built by (OMG) DEVELOPERS who saw a market with some hefty profit attached.

Actually, if you look at the history, there was some altruism involved. The people who actually did the nuts-and-bolts building may have been more about the money, but the idea of creating a park in the first place was largely an altruistic move. I can't recall from what I've read whose idea it was (whether it was a city government idea, or what), but the idea of coming up with the park in the first place was more in line with the "fairy godmother".

queencallipygos · December 2006

friendlypitbull wrote: Actually CI started off as a playground for the rich and had both 'luxury hotels' and amusment parks and beaches for families as well as other areas which were more 'adult' like gambling, horse racing, showgirls, etc...;
CI also always had an 'over the top' aspect to it w/ and Thor Equities plan is sort of reminisent of Samuel Friede' Globe Tower of 100yrs ago. Which btw is all very Vegas (circa today)

The image of teeming masses (family and otherwise) really only happened later when the Subways were completed and the Beaches were opened to the public (1920's). Then after WWII CI began to decline and essentially thats what it is today - a relic of its history, not a preservation of it.

*blinks* Okay, interesting. I hadn't heard that; the things I'd read state that a "fun for the lower class" thing was the intent. What are your sources?

And this sincerely isn't a challenge, I'm kind of "armchair amateur historian" and this is interesting.

escap wrote: No, I was not referring to AY at all, as a matter of fact. But since you bring up the issue of property rights, I'd like to point out that it's the right of the current owners of Coney Island to sell it to whomever they please without government intervention, and for the new owners to build on the land that they bourght and paid for also without intervention. If you believe government intrusion into this right, without any form of compensation, is justified, then eminent domain--which at least provides compensation--seems like a good deal in comparison. So thank you for bringing private property rights up as an issue.

I don't believe I ever said that the individual owners of the property didn't or shouldn't have that right. I agree they are indeed free to make whatever choice they wish. Just as I am free to express my disappointment with the choices they make.

friendlypitbull · December 2006

queencallipygos wrote:
*blinks* Okay, interesting. I hadn't heard that; the things I'd read state that a "fun for the lower class" thing was the intent. What are your sources?

And this sincerely isn't a challenge, I'm kind of "armchair amateur historian" and this is interesting.

Virtually any book speaking of the history of the area will tell you this - try searching on Google for the Manhattan Beach Hotel; Brighton Beach Hotel and the Oriental Hotel (all early luxury hotels in CI)

carnivore · December 2006

For those interested, one author has offered a free download of his entire book about the history of Coney Island (in pdf form) here:
http://www.professorsolomon.com/cibookpage.html

leeho · December 2006

Thanks Carnivore. I'm going to try and read it over X-mas break.

jdsx · December 2006

I live in Luna Park and the whole area is a shithole. Most of you would not walk there at night without a bunch of other people around. Residents of Brighton Beach almost never cross the West 5th line when strolling the boardwalk. Residents of Seagate are prisoners. The buildings in Coney Island don't have character, they are dirty dilapidated hovels. Astroland is junk, the rides are uninteresting, dangerous, and even the crooked games don't have any appeal. Coney Island is the only beachfront neighborhood I've seen that could be transplanted into some wartorn Middle Eastern country and fit right in. The place needs a lot of love and this is a great start. By all rights Coney Island should be one of the hottest areas in the borough but it's not. With a good vision it could become hipper than Williamsburg with homes as beautiful as Park Slope....all with the beach and boardwalk nearby.

leeho · December 2006

friendlypitbull wrote: LeeHO I dont know why you have to get personal, possibly b/c you cant argue the merits of you position in an intellectual way, while it may reflect that your cognitive abilites are not up to the task, it more likely reflects that your position isnt sound.

As to where you can experience what you cite - while I havent sampled all the seaside amusment parks/towns in the world, you certainly can experience them in CI and based on the current plans anyway - you will still be able to experience all of them at CI (except for maybe animal cruelty and dirty log flume water) .

Sorry that you find vibrant communities boring, maybe you can find another area and its residents willing to live with continued delapidation, economic stagnation and poor amenities so as to provide you with the 'exciting' urban experience you so crave to VISIT.

Ah, Friendly Pitbull, you see you are the one who has put yourself in the frame to be criticized. I personally don't give a fuck about your attacks regarding my intellect. IF they want to improve they economic situation for CI residents they should tear down those god-awful projects and get people out of towers. Those condos you so strongly support aren't going to be housing those people.

Get off the soapbox. The amusement park doesn't compound or attract blight. The continuation of shitty urban planning from the 1960's. What will occur will be a sad display of people who have a lot of money and stuffing it into the faces of the poor, who will continue live right next to them in sad and distorted reflections of the new towers they plan to build.

jdsx · December 2006

The amusement park IS blight. And as for those sad poor having to see the evil rich, I'd say they'll be much happier selling to the evil rich as values go up thanks to renewed interest in the neighborhood.

leeho · December 2006

How the fuck is the amusement park blight?

kristina · December 2006

UnderTheHill wrote: [quote=kristina]hmm, I really love coney island with all it's history and what it could be.. but admit, it needs a little love. the beach is gross, the rides are truly scary (like they might fall apart) and all the abandoned buildings cant attract much more than rats and roaches.
I don't know much about thor equities and what they plan to do (any more info on that??)
i wish it could be restored to what it was in it's prime...
as long as it stays an amusement park though i guess it'll be fun.
time to go snap up some photos.

I would need to ask when was the last time you stepped foot on the beach? I go several times every summer, taking the Q to Brighton Beach, and it's very well kept, and the water is actually clear!

of course you would need to ask.
Been there 3-5 times every year for the past 5 years. In winter and in summer, I really think the history is amazing but the place is truly derelict. I stopped going in the water after the second year. There's just something about swimming with plastic bags and diapers I don't like. I was referring to Coney Island beach, which is directly in front of the boardwalk. I agree Brighton beach is a little cleaner, but I would think it's because the russian community there seems to really love (and care for?) it.

willregistersoon · December 2006

Can you tell me another place that still has a freak show next to the ocean?

That has a World Fair Attraction that still operates and scares you simply cuz of its age?

That has Brooklyn accents taunting you to shoot a baloon and you do?

That has a water flume with algae all over it?

Damn LeeHo - you just blew any crediblity you had when you wrote this stuff. What do you want there anyway? The place is a rusting shithole right now. It needs a serious influx of cash. Private development is where the cash is coming from - and private developers develop things for *gasp* profit??? I dont know if what they're going to build will be good or not - I don't think specifics have been decided yet - but whatever it is will hopefully be better than what's there now.

When its done, children will go there and have a blast - and in 40 years, that will be their nostalgia. NYC is and always has been a place of change. Some changes have been good - others not. But to hold on to the past simply because of your own vision and memories is foolworthy at the least.

friendlypitbull · December 2006

LeeHo wrote:
Get off the soapbox. The amusement park doesn't compound or attract blight. The continuation of shitty urban planning from the 1960's. What will occur will be a sad display of people who have a lot of money and stuffing it into the faces of the poor, who will continue live right next to them in sad and distorted reflections of the new towers they plan to build.

The issue for most CI residents and NYC as a whole is jobs - approximatly 1/4 million people currently work in Tourism related jobs now - if CI is developed into a viable attraction with new Amusment Parks, retail, and hotels it will mean many more jobs.

jdsx · December 2006

LeeHo wrote: How the fuck is the amusement park blight?

blight /blaɪt/
â€“noun
the state or result of being blighted or deteriorated; dilapidation; decay: urban blight.

What's hard to understand? Astroland is dilapidated on every level.

jdsx · December 2006

friendlypitbull wrote: [quote=LeeHo]
Get off the soapbox. The amusement park doesn't compound or attract blight. The continuation of shitty urban planning from the 1960's. What will occur will be a sad display of people who have a lot of money and stuffing it into the faces of the poor, who will continue live right next to them in sad and distorted reflections of the new towers they plan to build.

The issue for most CI residents and NYC as a whole is jobs - approximatly 1/4 million people currently work in Tourism related jobs now - if CI is developed into a viable attraction with new Amusment Parks, retail, and hotels it will mean many more jobs.
Who said it's about jobs? I would say the number one issue is property value since CI is heavily residential followed a close second by overall living environment...meaning available shopping, dining, the area's cosmetic appearance, and entertainment.

jayce · December 2006

kristina wrote: There's just something about swimming with plastic bags and diapers I don't like.

oooh, you should try swimming in the Hudson and East River then. Coney Island water is like Poland Springs in comparison. (sadly, I know this.)

friendlypitbull · December 2006

I find it shocking...but the Brooklyn Papers has written an editorial SUPPORTING Thor Equities plans for Coney Island - amazing

Thor is god of Coney
Editorial
The Brooklyn Papers

The news this week that a Coney Island real-estate developer will raze Astroland and build a $1.5-billion, Vegas-like menagerie was greeted with the usual hue and cry from nostalgia-addled Brooklynites who remember the â€œglory daysâ€ of Coney Island.

But anyone who has actually spent time in Coney Island â€” the one that exists today, not the one in those misty water-color memories, to quote Brooklynite Barbra Streisand â€” is cheering the move by Thor Equities to purchase the land where Astroland sits and clear it after next summerâ€™s carnival season.

â€œItâ€™s not going to be the Coney Island the way I know Coney Island,â€ one longtime resident told the Daily News this week, setting up a great punchline: â€œTheyâ€™re going to make it nice.â€

Indeed, â€œniceâ€ is a commodity in limited quantities in todayâ€™s Coney Island. The reality on the ground is that the amusement area is dirty, run-down and uninviting. Where other Americans get to enjoy family friendly theme parks, visitors to Coney Island get a garbage dump by the sea.

While beloved by many, Astroland, whose name harkens back to the optimistic days of the Apollo moonshots, shows its age. Even the most charitable visitor canâ€™t help but feel that this rotting playland feels like a placeholder for something better.

Others have certainly rushed in â€” and failed â€” where Thor Equities dares to tread. But unlike earlier dreamers, developer Joe Sitt owns far more properties and has made a far-larger financial commitment, spending well over $100 million just on land acquisition so far.

And unlike developers in other parts of Brooklyn, Sitt doesnâ€™t have his hand extended in search of massive public subsidies â€” at least, not yet.

Sitt says he is committed to keeping what is great about Coney â€” its honky-tonk spirit, its wacky architecture and, of course, the landmarked 80-year-old Cyclone roller coaster â€”even while he sweeps away the filth and the 1960s-era kitsch.

And unlike Disney â€” which scouted land in Coney Island a few years ago â€” Sitt is a real New Yorker. Thatâ€™s no small thing in a neighborhood that was terrified by the possibility that a G-rated Mickey Mouse would someday be strutting down the Boardwalk alongside the R-rated Mermaids of Dick Zigunâ€™s â€œConey Island USA.â€

escap · December 2006

Friendlypitbull, a thousand kudos for posting this article, and for keeping the fight going while I was too busy to check in.

leeho · December 2006

You guys make me sound like I'm the only one who is bummed about this. Go to Coney Island USA's website and take a look for yourself.

Anyway, I lifted this from rthe site, which addresses some of the issues escap and FriendlyPitbull have raised. I think it is well thought out and well-written.

A major coup for Thor, but this is EXTREMELY disturbing. Focusing on the statement:

The scope of the project has raised the ire of some Coney Island residents, who worry the size of some of the planned buildings will overwhelm the area. The company meanwhile is planning to launch a major promotional campaign to generate support for the project.

This sounds like another project that will ram a development, like it or not, down the community's throat - similar to Bruce Ratner's Atlantic Yards. If Thor is so sure that they are revitalizing the area and doing right by the folks who visit C.I., then why would they need to launch a "major promotional campaign to generate support for the project." It's because whatever thy are planning is going to be outside of the zoning, geared toward more affluent visitors, and the jobs will be predominantly minimum wage.

It is going to be interesting to see how south Brooklyn reacts to this. They have offered overwhelming supported Ratner's mega-development, sweetheart deal in northern Brooklyn - much to the dismay of people who will actually have to live in that project's shadow. Now, we will see how they react to this similar "single developer" giveaway in their own backyard. I won't be so exciting having a huge development increasing traffic beyond road and infrastructure capacity when its in their own yard. (Maybe it's Karma).

Anyway, Thor now owns C.I. I think the CIDC has done a great disservice to C.I. and this city by not demanding a diversity of development. Coming soon: million dollar condos to the C.I. boardwalk and SEASONAL rich folks complaining about the noise. SEASONAL rich folks complaining about the poor people hanging on the boardwalk at night. Seaside condos sold to SEASONAL buyers, who will offer NOTHING to the economy of C.I. in the off season.

Watch for the glitzy grand-opening of Sitt's follie. Coney Island will never attain a "year round" economy. I think the CIDC has really screwed the residents of this city and Brooklyn. Another backdoor deal brokered and Thor still demands a housing component.

Now, we need to look at the CIDC board members and start watching for what they negotiated for themselves out of this deal.

Suddenly, C.I. USA looks like a sell-out. Getting Zigun on that board was a sly political move to facilitate this. Now, we'll hear either the defense or the silence. Either way, the C.I. museum is now irrelevant because the founder took part in this debacle.

The anger and outrage I feel toward the CIDC is really beyond words. This news is not exciting and not good. It's like getting sucker punched in the gut.

If you want to see what to expect, check out this link and look at the "exciting" Thor developments in existence. http://www.thorequities.com/properties.html

Coming soon: The Coney Island Shopping Mall.

http://www.coneyisland.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=news;action=display;num=1164739362

leeho · December 2006

leeho · December 2006

As if this is a dead forum!

Read this article from the Voice from 2005:

Scary Ride at Coney Island
Extreme makeover not amusing to everybody in the amusement district
by Neil deMause
June 28th, 2005 11:48 AM

Last Saturday, the 23rd annual Mermaid Parade drew record throngs to Coney Island for Brooklyn's yearly celebration of homemade spangle and semi-nudity. With Corona-swigging hipsters commingling with the polychromatic crowds that populate the beach on most summer weekends, the parade has become the defining feature of a Coney Island that is beginning to reclaim its throne as the city's locus of low-budget populist entertainment.

But Coney Island's success, some fear, may prove to be its undoing. Both a city redevelopment agency and a private developer are sniffing around the suddenly hot amusement district, and the result could be a makeover that leaves the home of the Cyclone dramatically altered.

"To be nostalgic for the Coney Island we have known the past 20 or 30 years, which is an emaciated shell of its former self, is wrongâ€”you want things to be built in Coney Island," says Coney Island USA director Dick Zigun, founder of both the Mermaid Parade and Sideshows by the Seashore. His worry, he says, is that because of the direction the process is heading, "the people who have put their hearts and souls in, the smaller operators in this amusement park, are going to get screwed."

Once a mile-long strip of carnival rides and other budget-priced attractions, Coney Island's amusement district shrunk to a handful of blocks by the 1960s, as Robert Moses-spawned housing projects and vacant lots replaced such landmarks as Luna Park and Steeplechase Park. In recent years, though, as the city has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into neighborhood improvementsâ€”a refurbished boardwalk, the Brooklyn Cyclones ballpark, and the soaring new Stillwell Avenue subway terminalâ€”planners both public and private have begun eyeing the area as ripe for a makeover.

The first to get involved was the Coney Island Development Corporation, formed two years ago by the city to explore ways to "revitalize" the area. What this means, says CIDC president (and City Hall development official) Josh Sirefman, is "finding ways to balance capitalizing on Coney Island's extraordinary allure as an oceanside location, while also looking for opportunities to create year-round activity." Early drafts of the master plan include rezoning parts of the amusement district (mostly vacant lots across Surf Avenue from the stadium) to allow for low-rise housing with stores on the first floor.

More recently, amusement owners' ears perked up when Thor Equities, a developer that specializes in targeting "underperforming" properties and then developing them as shopping mallsâ€”their main local achievement is the depressing Albee Square Mall (now the Gallery at Fulton Street) in downtown Brooklynâ€”began buying up properties left and right in the amusement district. Thor CEO Joe Sitt (who did not return calls for this article) recently told local business owners that he hopes to build a multi-story mall and indoor water park along the boardwalk behind Nathan's and the current Coney Island USA building. Topping it would be a mooring pad for a blimp that would sail the city skies touting the virtues of Coney Island.

Which if it sounds kinda crazy, that would certainly be Coney Island. And while the mom-and-pop operators who run most of the amusement district would prefer more carnival-friendly additions, like a resuscitated Parachute Jump, they wouldn't turn down the new foot traffic that year-round attractions would generate. But some worry that the sort of year-round tenants that Thor would wantâ€”and that the CIDC is seeking to provide shopping and jobs for local residentsâ€”would drive up rents to the point where the seasonal businesses would be priced out. Already, Zigun notes, he's been offered only a one-year lease renewal, at a 50 percent increase; he's currently scouting around for a place to relocate.

Sirefman insists that it will be possible to balance the growth of a year-round community with the needs of the summer crowds. But those in the district remain concerned. The CIDC "certainly seems to be making a real effort to keep the old Coney Island concept central to it," says Astroland owner Carol Hill Albert. "It's just going to take a gargantuan imagination to translate what's always been a summer business into year-round."

This Must be Stopped! Astroland Closing?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories