Gothamist: Good Bye, Astroland; Next Summer Will Be Its Last

NewYorkDave

Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:11:31 -0500

New York feels less like New York all the time. So long, Astroland. So long, Coney Island. I'll miss you.

Not Amused

Sun, 03 Dec 2006 07:35:05 -0500

I knew this day was coming when I started seeing yuppies strolling around Coney Island ! It was just a matter of time before somebody thought to take away the last remaining relic of Brooklyn's past ! It's sad thinking that this will be the last year folks we be able to enjoy a nice summer day out in the current Coney Island . I wonder what they will call it when there finished destroying it ? "Coney Island Condo's" ! Go home Yuppies, We don't want you here !!!!

Andrew J. Lederer

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:26:59 -0500

Jack -- Just to be clear (you'll see this if you read all my comments, I have no little hope that Thor Equities will improve Coney -- I think they will hurt it. And I argued here against a soulless "corporate" approach. I just pointed out that leaving it as it is is not gonna happen and that the right kind of changes/improvements would be a good thing. (Which I don't think is inconsistent with what you are saying.) If you want to know what I actually think should be done there, I think there should be major investment in bringing back the Coney that once was and that still exists in the minds of people around the world. I think the great parks should be rebuilt with state of the art technology at their core but a first half of the 2oths century (and even a bit of what came earlier) as its aesthetic. And I think most/much of what's there now should be preserved as part of that plan; with the small business owners who've kept the place alive encouraged -- and helped -- to stay. I think the Elephant Hotel should be rebuilt, bigger and better. (Someone else suggested this too.) You get the idea. BTW, I went to the Brighton Beach Baths fairly often growing up as my cousins and grandparents were members. And I was camp counselor at the Shorefront Y. And more recently, I lived in Trump Village. SO (he said defensively), I think I do know what I'm talking about. Andrew

Andrew J. Lederer

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:16:40 -0500

Why are you yelling at me? I didn't argue in favor of these guys. Andrew **************************************** Dear Andrew J. Lederer, You have no idea what you are talking about on any level. I grew up in Brighton Beach and spent much time in Coney as a kid/teen/adult. The deal is even when Coney was not an "urban ruin" it was still an affordable and open getaway for the working class of this city. It still is in many ways. And it's still a place where small business owners at least have a fighting chance to start a small amusement business and do something other than work for a chain store. The state of decay it's in now is not great. But who said thart cleaning up Coney Island requires ONE developer to own that much land? And what will they do with it? I really doubt they will make it a modern Dreamland or Luna Park. I'm sure they will initially build it with a nod towards the amusement area, but ultimately they will acquire land so they can develop co-ops and condos. And what's bad about that? A lot. Most average working people in this city cannot afford to live in such buildings. And the Oceana developement on the former Brighton Beach Baths is basically a gated community where those who can pay to live there live there. That's not the Coney Island or Brighton Beach I grew up in and know. The Brighton Beach Baths was a neighborhood beach club that anyone could join and enjoy. Rich or poor. Ditto with the beach itself. The real issue here is having one developer own that much land and the privatization of that land for the good of the developer to the detriment of the larger community. I think everyone would like Coney to be cleaned up, but this tabula rasa approach is stupid and will destroy a unique part of NYC that just can be recreated. [30] Posted by: Jack | November 30, 2006 7:57 AM

Spencer

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:36:30 -0500

Who wants to buy a luxury condo way the BFE at the end of the D line? Or F, Q, what have you. [26] Posted by: Traci | November 29, 2006 5:58 PM ************************************************** Like Andrew said, there's a beach there! Why wouldn't you want to buy a luxury condo out there if you had the money and liked the ocean?

Jack

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 07:57:40 -0500

Dear Andrew J. Lederer, You have no idea what you are talking about on any level. I grew up in Brighton Beach and spent much time in Coney as a kid/teen/adult. The deal is even when Coney was not an "urban ruin" it was still an affordable and open getaway for the working class of this city. It still is in many ways. And it's still a place where small business owners at least have a fighting chance to start a small amusement business and do something other than work for a chain store. The state of decay it's in now is not great. But who said thart cleaning up Coney Island requires ONE developer to own that much land? And what will they do with it? I really doubt they will make it a modern Dreamland or Luna Park. I'm sure they will initially build it with a nod towards the amusement area, but ultimately they will acquire land so they can develop co-ops and condos. And what's bad about that? A lot. Most average working people in this city cannot afford to live in such buildings. And the Oceana developement on the former Brighton Beach Baths is basically a gated community where those who can pay to live there live there. That's not the Coney Island or Brighton Beach I grew up in and know. The Brighton Beach Baths was a neighborhood beach club that anyone could join and enjoy. Rich or poor. Ditto with the beach itself. The real issue here is having one developer own that much land and the privatization of that land for the good of the developer to the detriment of the larger community. I think everyone would like Coney to be cleaned up, but this tabula rasa approach is stupid and will destroy a unique part of NYC that just can be recreated.

anon

Thu, 30 Nov 2006 01:17:08 -0500

I spent many summers at Coney Island/Brighton Beach with family and am sad to see it go, but I cannot stop the wheels of progress from changing when people with billions in capital can and do what they do. It's a kind of learned helplessness really, until I achieve the financial independence and security to do what I would like.

Andrew J. Lederer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:21:59 -0500

Who wants to buy a luxury condo way the BFE at the end of the D line? Or F, Q, what have you. [26] Posted by: Traci | November 29, 2006 5:58 PM ************************************************** Lots of people. For example,there are many in the new buildings where Brighton Beach Baths used to be. It's beautiful out there; it's on the beach, for god's sake. Not every New Yorker needs to be close to the Lower East Side. (But if they do, the F'll get'em there.)

dylan

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:05:16 -0500

what does this mean for the siren festival???

Traci

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:58:03 -0500

Who wants to buy a luxury condo way the BFE at the end of the D line? Or F, Q, what have you.

Meh

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:34:54 -0500

Um, this all happened yesterday -- pretty stale on Wednesday Gothamist... pretty stale. -

Spencer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 17:04:51 -0500

Andrew, Dundy and Thompson built Luna in such a way that they were flat broke by the time it opened. The way in which they financed it (for better or for worse) simply wouldn't be possible today I'm afraid. (Didn't they have to comb the beach just to find money for change for the first customers?) It's just the world we live in. As for Dreamland being a failure, it certainly wasn't because it was "cookie cutter" or anything like that. Yes, it was meant to be direct competition to Luna but from all accounts it was one of the most interesting, unique places that have ever blessed us with its presence. Luna was struggling along with Dreamland. Afterall, by 1912 Thompson was bankrupt and his assests taken by banks. If you're going to blame anything, blame the rise of the cinema and other attractions for Dreamland's demise, not that it was developed by shady real estate investors. Anyway, it's nice that this seems to be promoting a discussion and interest in Coney's history.

Jessie

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:06:49 -0500

You go SPENCER! Tell it like it is.

Andrew J. Lederer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:31:43 -0500

Re. #17: Steeplechase Park was open for more than 65 years and was founded and operated by George C. Tilyou, the, "first impresario of controlled chaos." Elmer "Skip" Dundy and Frederic Thompson were a bankrupted railroad tycoon and a drunk architect who together had, as I said, vision and passion. Their Luna Park was the apex of Coney Island's amusement grandeur and for 41 years. Dreamland was the only one of Coney's storied amusement parts that was created by a more or less modern-style developer and it was considered a colossal failure -- judged, as it was, by its owner's "corporate" perspective. When it burned down after just 8 years of operation, it was not rebuilt.

Chris

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:44:45 -0500

The wonder wheel is safe. Its something that can easily become a landmark if they would try to take it down. See Dreamland was the most underhanded and corrupt business doing of all time. So many underhanded deals and bad things went on there. Being around some oldfolk you hear about it. But it was different. It was something TOTALLY unique. I am all in favor of progress and change but keep it different. Id rather not have the cradle of oddities become another card in the deck with a pretty picture on it. Ive traveled most of the united states and have seen most of the beach resorts and beside the aesthetic of sunsets and weather they were interchangeable. Things in coney islnd make you feel like you live or work in the oddest place possible. Because of its reputation of having been a terrible area or it being one it also has this reputation for history thats not like any other. The combination of both manmade steel and concrete and the pure insanity of the meshing of all the cultures. This place hasnt been economized yet. You can buy a shirt that says Coney Island from a vendor on the street who'll press it for you right in front of you. You can go to the freakshow and the owner will be standing outside clad in his top hat. How many places can you find like that? The homestyle of being in such a small place with the ramifications of having so much time behind it. I dont know to me progress would be making the old newer. Im not for the cut and burn idea.

A Biker

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:25:44 -0500

Sad news. I have been going to Coney Island for years. As an adult I see my kids having the same great time as I did. I guess we will have to wait and see what they put up, but most likely it will be just another food-court looking mess. What will the new rides be called? The Starbuck's Coffee cup ride? The prices will go way up, and at the end of the day you will have spent 3 times as much for half the fun. Oh, well. Guess we are off to Jersey like everyone else. If I am wrong, I will post it here for all to see. I doubt it....

Adam

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:16:32 -0500

I am happy the Cyclone is staying, but what about the Wonder Wheel? It would be an immense tragedy if it were to be demolished.

BrianVan

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:54:49 -0500

#13: There are certainly benefactors around, but they live in Seattle, Omaha, Atlanta, and Bentonville, AR. No longer are the nation's holders of massive wealth centered in New York City and NY State. And also, it's trendy to give all the money to third-world disease control rather than local attractions. (Which makes sense) Part of the upsetting thing about the culture that we've created is that we now have a city full of young hungry developers and bankers who are more than willing (hungry, even) to bulldoze cherished neighborhoods and public spaces for the chance to build the ever-present "luxury condos" and "luxury resorts". There is no restraint or modesty on their part, they are rabid and insatiable. They are literally building places where everyone wants to buy, but no one wants to live. (The market for luxury condos is kept afloat, in part, by foreign investors taking advantage of the weak dollar. Many of them buy properties without ever stepping foot on them; Only a few actually live full-time in their "investments") The city stands to collect more and more taxes every year without actually having to support a bigger population, and I think they're keen to do that given what had happened in the 70's and 80's here in civic government - they literally can't afford to save any part of the city, as they nearly went bankrupt without a safety net (both the state and the federal government said "drop dead" at the time). So they're in on it. Astroland might not be a liability, but what they'd build in its place would almost certainly be a necessity in that regard. Previously I'd been in support of Coney Island redevelopment, but I had no idea Thor would go this far. They would truly be a bunch of pricks if they followed through on this. There is plenty of land for redevelopment for MILES surrounding, without needing to encroach on a historic public space. Might I also remind everyone that these "luxury residences" will be down the block from a housing project. Just saying...

Spencer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:44:02 -0500

To #14 -- Steeplechase, Luna Park, etc. were not "corporate" in the sense of the word as used to condemn the ongoing homogenization of the city. Nobody objects to a for-profit use of the area. But the owners of those great, old parks were like the owners of Astroland writ large. They were men with vision and passion. They were not, to my knowledge, "real estate developers" of the Thor Equities type. [16] Posted by: Andrew J. Lederer | November 29, 2006 12:31 PM ************************************************************* Actually... (on the founding of Dreamland from http://www.westland.net/coneyisland/articles/dreamland.htm ) "Luna Park's success in 1903 made other real estate promoters and local politicians envious. Former Republican State Senator William H. Reynolds and his local cronies believed that a more elaborate amusement park than Luna would draw Coney Island's immense crowds and be profitable. Working from his office on the top floor of Manhattan's Flatiron Building, he formed the Wonderland Corporation (later changed to Dreamland Corporation) and cut in his friends, Pat McCarren, Brooklyn's Democratic political boss and Timothy Sullivan, a notorious downtown New York Democratic leader. In July two parcels of ocean front property, that had been pieced together through trickery and subterfuge by the late John Y. McKane, came up for auction. Reynold's, concealing his intentions by others bidding in his behalf, bought the 15 acres; $200,000 for one parcel and $247,000 for the other. The property was located between Surf Avenue and the ocean. "

Andrew J. Lederer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:31:08 -0500

I for one am sad to see Astroland go but am VERY excited for the possibility of a new Coney Island that, like in the Luna era, is a worldwide destination. This is good for Brooklyn and good for the city as a whole. [14] Posted by: Spencer | November 29, 2006 12:08 PM ************************************************************* Maybe. The city usually believes any perfunctory "development" in the outer boroughs is "progress" and "good for place borough name here". If it's not Manhattan, they figure as long as a crane is goin' and some bricks are being laid, something good is happening -- hence, for instance, the ridiculously mislocated Ikea Red Hook. The exceptions, of course, are the "hip" areas where -- as in the case of the Atlantic Yards project -- rapacious, oversized, Manhattan-style development is pursued. To #14 -- Steeplechase, Luna Park, etc. were not "corporate" in the sense of the word as used to condemn the ongoing homogenization of the city. Nobody objects to a for-profit use of the area. But the owners of those great, old parks were like the owners of Astroland writ large. They were men with vision and passion. They were not, to my knowledge, "real estate developers" of the Thor Equities type.

Tom P

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:09:14 -0500

Jayzus, why not just raze the entire city and put up a replica of Atlanta or Phoenix? Who needs history and character when you can have soulless cardboard condo boxes everywhere? We still haven't recovered from the wave of white brick highrise shitboxes that went up after the war, but they look like a collaboration between Frank Lloyd Wright and Christopher Wren next to the stuff we're getting now.

Spencer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:08:33 -0500

Oh come on, we're worried it's going to become corporate? What do you think Luna Park, Dreamland, and Steeplechase were? Acts of charity? Those were some of the most corporate places you can imagine and yes, they charged admission. I for one am sad to see Astroland go but am VERY excited for the possibility of a new Coney Island that, like in the Luna era, is a worldwide destination. This is good for Brooklyn and good for the city as a whole.

jmchez

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:08:06 -0500

I remember when the American Museum of Natural History decided to build a new planetarium. By the way the critics came out of the woodwork to complain and even file lawsuits, you would have thought that they were demolishing Penn Station all over again. Now, the city has an architectural jewel and a tremendous 21st century tourist attraction. What happened to Penn Station should never be repeated; destroying something great and impossible to rebuild for something crappy and, essentially, disposable. However, neither Shea Stadium, or the Coney Island Aquarium or Astroland or even the atrocious 1970s version of Yankee Stadium are that. Astroland could not possibly continue to deteriorate and decay without somebody trying to use the space and its privileged location for the better. Unfortunately, there are no John D. Rockefeller around anymore to buy huge chunks of land and give it away to the public. Investors want a return and the city wants tax revenue. It's either that or watching all the recreation money flow into more and more 21st century developments in New Jersey.

Kevin Walsh

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:07:06 -0500

I'm just concerned they'll homogenize the place (as many NYC neighborhoods are being homogenized as the varied, eclectic architecture of the past is being razed in favor of blandness) and priced out of the range of the middle class, if any of us are left in 10 years. Yes, the sketches we've seen are interesting but the finished product won't look like that; it'll probably be towers along the boardwalk, like Long Beach. I'm far from a nostalgist (the bookstore shelves are choked with reminiscences of Ebbets, which is gone now 50 years --give it a rest)...but gimme miniature golf, sideshows by the seashore, astroland, and Nathans. Spiff it up, but keep the Coney atmosphere as is. Why ruin it? www.forgotten-ny.com

smitty

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 12:00:48 -0500

...and it's going to look like Universal CityWalk.

bklynd

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:34:09 -0500

My main worry about redevelopment is that Coney Island might lose its "open" feeling - the idea that you can get out there, stroll around, throw a few bucks here and there for food and skee-ball, and have fun. I mean, you can park right next to the Cyclone if you are lucky. Compare that to an enclosed water park - $20, no readmission! "Yeah, we did the water park once last summer, it was pretty crowded but the kids really liked it."

Chris

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:24:05 -0500

I have worked and been around coney island for all my life. Having seen reformation after reformation new things have been grown around. What I dont like is the out of the box thinking. From what Ive seen that means "What if we take all the character and richness of the area and put some white paint over it". I see a fully enclosed stadium of rides and amusements year around with hundreds of young people scrambling around. Not that I dont think potential is possible. If they were to restore alot of past then Id like to see the idea. Coney Island really isnt something you should bring into the future. The reason people like coming here is not the futuristic locale. But if the Shore were to be redone and rebuilt, Dreamland resurface, the Elephant hotel rebuilt and maybe just maybe build a monster and name it the Thunderbolt. What is freaking me out is that if you ever watch the movie A.I. the ending is in coney island and dreamland is there. Is this whole thing following into the idea of a movie? There was no astroland in the movie and a makeshift wonder wheel. Makes you think.

Elderta

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:11:55 -0500

I was very sad when I saw this today in the paper.

Andrew J. Lederer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 11:06:25 -0500

"You won't be getting Dreamland or Luna Park back...seems like you'll be getting Luxury Condo Land." Then why not agitate against that, rather than taking it passively? ********************************************************************** "I like Coney as it is. Affordable. www.forgotten-ny.com" Forgive me for saying this, but in a practical sense, who cares what you like? You -- like me and many others -- are a weirdo who specializes (thank god, we need you) in the musty relics and ruins of New York's storied past. And indeed there is much to cherish in the "ruined" (and affordable) version of Coney Island. But it's not going to stay this way, whether you like it or not. So, the only thing a lover of New York can do (aside from whine or mope) is work to make the change a positive one.

no

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:53:48 -0500

or corporate pimped out land look for new bright rides named after banks for sure

Kevin Walsh

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:49:04 -0500

You won't be getting Dreamland or Luna Park back...seems like you'll be getting Luxury Condo Land. I like Coney as it is. Affordable. www.forgotten-ny.com

Andrew J. Lederer

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:32:55 -0500

one resident said, "It's not going to be Coney Island the way I know Coney Island. They're going to make it nice." ************************************************* Sheesh. While I have little doubt that what Thor Equities does will be awful, the notion that Coney Island should not be "nice" is a preposterous one. This "things must remain exactly as I've known them" philosophy is NIMBYism taken to it's most bizarre extreme. Don't get me wrong. There is no greater enemy of the soulless architectural cancer metastasizing through and homogenizing this city. But who among us would not be thrilled beyond measure to walk into Dreamland or Luna Park as they were in their glory? And I believe they were "nice".

Meredith

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:14:55 -0500

Absolutely ridiculous. I can't believe Coney Island is going the way of the dodo.

Kay

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:09:36 -0500

That's it. New York is officially over.

tim

Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:01:26 -0500

MONEY ISLAND