Leading up to tonight’s scoping meeting of the Coney Island revamp, various advocacy groups and others are staking out positions on the city’s plan, a few of which have ended up in our inbox. The comments are on the latest iteration of the plan, which was altered after it met opposition from Councilman Domenic Recchia, who sided with landowners including major property owner Joseph Sitt.
The hearing, which starts at six in Coney Island, has attracted a large bit of attention given that it’s ostensibly intended for comments on what should or should not be included in a draft environmental impact statement. Opponents of the city’s plan have promised to show up in force, and one woman has even gone on a hunger strike for the occasion. Yikes.
From the Regional Plan Association’s testimony:
Although the revised proposal calls for a smaller outdoor entertainment area, the plan retains its ambitious vision of both outdoor and indoor amusement, supporting commercial activity and new housing. It would vastly improve the area and help achieve a thriving and welcoming Coney Island for the 21st Century. To insure that the current plan maximizes these benefits, we want to suggest the proposed rezoning requires uses that are compatible with a regional destination area such as entertainment and other complementary retail uses.
From a press release put out by housing groups ACORN and the Pratt Center for Community Development:
Today NY ACORN and the Pratt Center called for the city to revise the plan to include:
- More affordable housing on the 12% of publicly owned land in the EIS area slated for housing;
- A commitment to prohibit additional sale or swapping of any land to any private developer without a commitment to deeper affordability;
- A plan to use some of the profits generated from new development to preserve existing Section 8 and Mitchell-Lama buildings including Sea Rise I and II 3325 and 3415 Neptune Avenue and Northbay Estates at 2730 W. 33rd Street