Locals Reject Land Use Change That Would Pave Way for Coney Island Casino

By Kirstyn Brendlen, Brooklyn Paper

A southern Brooklyn community board voted against changing land use rules for the proposed Coney Island casino on Wednesday night in the project’s latest setback.

Community Board 13 voted 24 to 11 to deny developers’ application to close part of Bowery Street and purchase air rights above existing buildings in the nabe to make way for the facility, dubbed “The Coney.” Eight board members abstained from voting, and three recused themselves from the proceedings.

Though the board’s vote is strictly advisory and the land use application is not directly tied to The Coney’s push to get a state gaming license, public approval does play a large part in who will receive those licenses — and Coney Islanders have strong feelings on all sides.

At the January 22 board meeting, locals packed the room to capacity, many waving signs provided by opposing organizers: “Stop the Phoney” and “No no no casino in Coney Island” for those against the project; “Yes to Jobs!” and “Build it Now!” for those in favor.

The Coney, as developers envision it now, would be a 1,431,730-square-foot facility stretching across several blocks near Stillwell Avenue and West 12th Street, built up above existing buildings and connected by enclosed “sky bridges.”

The team behind the casino, headed by Joe Sitt’s Thor Equities, has promised it would bring jobs and year-round economic opportunity to the nabe, and said this month it would create a $200 million public trust fund if the casino is built.

Some Coney Islanders said Wednesday that the neighborhood could use all the help it can get.

“My ‘yes’ to The Coney is for the investments in our community,” said resident Joseph Watson. “I’m talking about the kids and the young men and women that live in NYCHA, that are renters, OK, they’re not homeowners. These people, my people, we need an opportunity.”

Even if the jobs provided by the casino are “small,” he said, they could be the chance locals need to get a step up.

“We do know that they’re speaking about union jobs,” Watson said. “Even if they weren’t, the income that they’re making is already above what they’re making in the household already. There’s so many people here that are living below poverty.”

Others said that even if Coney Island is struggling, the casino isn’t what it needs.

Patrick Wall, executive director of Coney Island USA, said his business has been “trying to survive” for years, and that he would love to see new jobs in the neighborhood.

“This casino is not that,” he said. “We’re asking for a giant fort to come and plop down on top of our entire amusement district across three blocks. That’s crazy! It’s going to keep people locked in, they’ve got food, they’ve got accommodations, they’ve got entertainment. They’re never going to come outside, they’re never going to give us money.”

Coney Island USA student Jake Turner agreed.

“Big corporations see Coney Island not as a community, but a commodity,” he said. “A place they can extract wealth from with no regard for the people who live here.”

Community Board member Yelena Makhnin recalled visiting Coney Island with her family just days after she moved to the U.S. from the Soviet Union in 1992. The first photos she took in the U.S., she said, were of her children next to the Wonder Wheel.

Makhnin said The Coney’s promises were not enough, since Community Benefits Agreements are not legally enforceable.

“Until I see a binding document, it’s still a promise,” she said.

Sheila Smalls, a fellow board member, urged her colleagues to think differently. On the west side of Coney Island, where Smalls lives, almost everything residents used to enjoy is gone, she said — restaurants, pharmacies, movie theaters.

“All of these things now are a thing of the past,” she said. “Even this community board has to find a place for us to have meetings, because we don’t have a place.”

Other projects, like rezonings and a new shelter, have gone forward even though the community voted against them, Smalls said.

“So please, listen up, everybody has an opinion…if we have an olive branch, reach out and see what it’s about before you say no,” she said. “When you say no, you’re closing the door on everything, and I don’t see any other money coming from anywhere else.”

The application will next go before the Brooklyn Borough President, then the City Planning Commission, then the City Council, which will make the final decision to approve or deny.

In a statement, The Coney thanked its supporters, and emphasized that the community board vote will not directly impact whether or not the casino gets built — just what it will look like if it does. If the land use application is denied, but The Coney gets a state gaming license, the casino buildings would be shorter and built on separate lots, without the sky bridges.

“It is disappointing that some prominent members of the community have [misled] others into thinking this ULURP process is a de facto vote on whether or not this project can move forward,” a casino rep said. “As the outright owners of the fully developable lots, The Coney remains the bid most poised to put shovels in the ground on day one to kickstart what will be an economic revival for Coney Island and Southern Brooklyn.”

Editor’s note: A version of this story originally ran in Brooklyn Paper. Click here to see the original story.

Related Stories

• Locals Vote Against Street Demapping for Proposed Casino
• Fresh Renderings Show Glittering Proposed Coney Island Casino
• Coney Island Locals Voice Opposition to Gaming at Anti-Casino Panel

Email tips@brownstoner.com with further comments, questions or tips. Follow Brownstoner on X and Instagram, and like us on Facebook.