Some time ago, I wrote about the impending demolition of some of the oldest buildings in Coney Island. I also posted pictures of the beautiful yet tragically dilapidated Bank Building.
Incredibly, it was announced today that the proposed Coney Island Historic District, which would include the bank building above and a number of other historic properties in the area, MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR INCLUSION ON THE STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF HISTORIC PLACES, protecting them for generations to come.
If given the designation, the Registers of Historic Places could make grants and tax credits of up to 40% available for redevelopment projects that rehabilitate and reuse historic properties in the amusement area.
Unfortunately, this all may be too late: Thor Equities, run by Lucifer’s personal assistant Joseph Sitt, is moving forward hurriedly on the demolition of four of its properties, including the oldest building in Coney Island. The state office’s letter explicitly cites each of these buildings as being among historic district’s “key buildings.”
Once they are gone, they are never coming back, and honestly, you either fall into one of two categories. Either you realize that a major part of a neighborhood’s value is in its surviving history (see: the entirety of New York City, and why people prefer it to, say, Houston)…or you side with this woman, who commented earlier today in a really suspiciously worded letter. I apologize for the caps, but it’s how she chose to write her comment. Interpret as you will:
HELLO ALL.
SORRY TO BURST YOUR SITT BASHING BUBBLE BUT:
WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME ANY OF YOU TOOK YOUR KIDS TO THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THIS BUILDING? DID YOU FEEL GOOD WALKING WITH THEM AND CROSSING THE STREETS? I HAVE IN FACT PARKED MY CAR IN FRONT OF THIS ONCE BEAUTIFUL BANK LESS THAN A MONTH AGO. IN MY PARENTAL PERSPECTIVE IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL IN A PERFECT AND DREAM WORLD TO REFURBISH THIS OLD STRUCTURE AND MAKE SOMETHING USEFUL OUT OF IT. RIGHT NOW THE POSSIBILTY OF THIS HAPPENING IS ABOUT ZERO.
I WELCOME A REVAMPING OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD INCLUDING THE BUILDINGS ACROSS THE STREET. I WOULD LIKE MY CHILDREN TO FEEL SAFE WALKING DOWN THIS BLOCK AND THE SURROUNDING BLOCKS OF CONEY ISLAND. PUTTING UP NEW HOTELS AND STORE-FRONT BUSINESSES WOULD ADD JOBS AND SAFETY TO THIS HISTORIC AREA. I WONDER IF YOU ANY OF YOU WOULD CHOOSE TO RAISE YOUR CHILDREN IN A NEW CLEAN HOME OR RATHER CHOOSE TO LIVE IN A DECREPIT (YET SAVED) MAUSOLEUM FILLED WITH CRACK COCAINE. I PERSONALLY WOULD RATHER HAVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD CLEANED UP! GOOD FOR YOU JOE SITT- I AM ONE MOTHER WHO WANTS THIS BLOCK CLEANED UP AND THE CONEY ISLAND EXPERIENCE BACK TO THE CLASS IT ONCE HAD.
What frightens me most about this letter is how wildly it misses the point of all this, under the misguided belief that a new hotel and a few strip malls will suddenly turn Coney Island into a flourishing vibrant ocean-side resort overnight. Get real. What further confuses me is her idea that it would continue to be an “historic area”…minus the actual history (maybe someone smarter can explain that one to me).
I believe it can certainly be revamped over time, but tearing out the heart of its character simply leaves you with an address and nothing more. And personally, I would MUCH prefer to raise my kids in a new clean apartment built into the former bank building than I would a bland, boring, modern high-rise, in which my children get no sense of history or character as they progress through their most formative years, ultimately growing into little Joseph Sitt Jrs (good ol’ fashioned nightmare fuel right there).
As much as it saddens me, I don’t believe it’s possible to change the opinions of either Joseph Sitt or the above commenter, and it sucks that news of the historic district came at such a late date. I believe people approach history with one of two mindsets: respect or arrogance. At the very least, it’s nice to know our government sides with the former.
Check out SaveConeyIsland.net for more info and daily updates. Below, a picture from the site showing workmen (without a permit) beginning the demolition of the Henderson Music Hall, where Groucho Marx and his brothers made their debut.
-SCOUT
Isn’t it amazing how blind people can be?? In Europe this building would never have gone vacant, it would still be in use! Hell, the Pantheon in Rome, Italy which was originally a temple for Roman deities was converted to a Christian church after the empire fell, and it’s still in use today.
America has the habit of tossing out something that looks old, instead of preserving it for generations to come. The “shouter” needs to learn how to appreciate the past, because if we don’t learn from it, we’re doomed to repeat it.
I don’t even believe they would make a high-rise. They would just sell the land again and make tens of millions. This is the worst coney island hoax in history. They need to bring the Nets here somehow. It would save 2 birds with one nest. but not instead of the Bank and other landmarks like this.
I wonder what the fine is for destroying a landmark like this? It’s probably worth for them to pay the fine if anything. Or just pay the politician to revoke the fine.
Eloquent post
I don’t know what this woman is talking about; Coney Island is one of the most family friendly places I can think of AND you don’t have to be rich to enjoy it. Admittedly, I haven’t been there yet this year (the cruelty of Ringling Bros is keeping me away), but I’m definitely not buying what she’s selling.
ALL CAPS SAYS SHE MEANS IT! REMEMBER, CHILDREN ARE OUR FUTURE!
Hi Scout,
Brooklyn born and raised, and I’ve been following you for quite some time. I don’t know how often you actually consider your readers’ comments, and I’m not out to change your mind, I don’t think I would be able to if I tried. But here’s what I have to say:
As a design student who is studying for a career in architectural historic preservation, I completely agree that our past should be preserved. But it should also be kept in mind that our present, our future, and the futures of the generations to come matter just as much as our past. There is a limit to how much we must sacrifice in order to preserve. I say this because although I am supportive of preserving the Coney Island buildings, I’m also in favor of recreating Coney Island’s identity, despite the fact that doing so will require some heartbreaking sacrifices, especially in hard economic times like these, when what a capitalist country needs most are jobs and revenue. We can preserve the past, but we must not keep living in it.So I am also supportive of the shouting lady when she says we need to clean it up, especially considering she might be a nearby resident, and knows too well how dangerous the neighborhood has become. I remember summers at the beach and on the boardwalk, but now Coney Island is not at all what it used to be.
What is being done may not be the right approach; tearing down historic structures and rebuilding bland, generic hotels or what have you is never, ever the solution. But I think all 3 of us can agree that something has to be done with Coney Island, something that will both preserve its rich history, and incorporate the present, without having it look like a revival museum.
Hi Neen –
First, I absolutely read every comment posted to my site, and a lot of my opinions have changed after considering the many viewpoints that come into my site.
Second, I basically agree 100% with what you’ve written, which makes me fear I came off as overzealous in my post. I’ve always been of the belief that, while preservation is extremely important, it must factor in present and future concerns – which is why I’d have no problem seeing the Bank building converted or integrated into any number of designs.
I’ve also written frequently about the Admiral’s Row buildings, for example, which developers want to tear down in favor of a supermarket parking lot. While I want to see them preserved, I also feel they should serve the community, as opposed to simply standing as monuments to the past. One of the concerns I have with preservation is that in saving older structures, you turn a neighborhood or city into a static museum, which can be just as detrimental as demolition.
Ultimately, if a building must be torn down, I merely ask that whatever is built in its place is equal to or surpasses the aesthetic and functional quality and value of the previous structure.
Thanks for reading and clarifying. I’m relieved that your views aren’t as extreme as I had originally thought. I think very highly of you, I should have known better.
There are several different ways to preserve buildings that are on the National Register. What would be most useful here would be to preserve the exterior, but refurbish the inside. That way you could preserve the visual effects for the district, but inside make it functional for contemporary sensibilities and businesses or housing.
Ironically, refurbishing interiors creates lots of jobs – TONS of jobs – for carpenters, electricians, designers, engineers, and architects. Then there is the potential for jobs related to whatever business occupies the building later. To say keeping the buildings would keep the economy stagnant is hokum.
It’s amazing that people don’t realize that you CAN have your cake AND eat it too!
As a german resident growing up in a city called ‘Hanau’ (close to Frankfurt), I just want to add that, after an infamous war, Hanau was destroyed and many amazing architectural and historical buildings were nearly erased. We had an amazing little thater that was known all over the country. We had a huge castle in the heart of the city. There were royal parks and beautiful street lights. In Hanau, officials decided not to repair and rebuild these historic buildings, but instead use the situation to build state-of-the-art high-rises for many families, which was nice for them and lead to many hard working men living here. But it also meant big housing blocks with flat walls in grey and brown. It may have been the right decision back then, but it ultimately turned Hanau into a somewhat faceless city. Which eventually lead to it’s oblivion.
Luckily, Coney Island is more than one Bank buidling. But it says a lot, that I do remember much more of the surroundings from my trip to NY than just the Astro Park. Also, there is plenty of space outside the cities to build supermarkets. And, someone mentioned Rome: there are McDonald’s Restaurants build inside historic buidlings in Rome. If this means, the face of the city is safe for generations, I say keep on building McDonald’s into historic buildings! Just take a walk through Rome and you will be glad we are still able to enjoy this amazing city for what it is!
Phoenix has made it a habit of tearing down its old buildings, leaving with few historic places built before 1950. Its made the city into a modern megapolis with very little soul, very little history. I cringe when I hear stories like this, and am saddened that some people in NYC don’t see the value of their history
You say “But I think all 3 of us can agree that something has to be done with Coney Island, something that will both preserve its rich history, and incorporate the present, without having it look like a revival museum.” I agree. My concern is that it won’t stop with this one building.
Think I’ll go pull out my copy of Coney Island, the great silent movie with Buster Keaton and Fatty Arbunkle, and watch it non stop for a day or so.
I signed the petition on that website. I agree with the notion that we cannot preserve all heritage, but that does not mean that all heritage can be destroyed. It means that a decision must be made about what must be preserved and what can be done away with. In this case, the developer clearly has not made a decision and has shown no interest in paying attention to the historic dimension of the area he bought.
Hopefully the municipality of NYC will step in and make a decision for him. That’s what they’re there for, after all.
This is heartbreaking. Buildings like this could be refurbished in order to be made useful again. The same goes for Admiral’s Row. Compromises could be made which would serve everyone. However, people would rather do the easiest and cheapest thing rather than find the best solution to a problem. This is even more true in this economy where someone like Joseph Sitt will cry poor mouth.
BTW, there is no excuse whatsoever for the sort of letter you received. People can disagree in a civilized way.
I’m constantly amazed at how easy it is to lose focus in these conversations. Did anyone say that they preferred keeping a bank building to revitalizing the area? I’m of the opinion that reusing these buildings is the *key* to revitalizing. That said, some creative suggestions for how to do that might be in order, since Mr. Sitt isn’t the most creative apple on the tree.
But I don’t see how having an empty lot filled with garbage where a building used to be makes anyone’s kids safer.
Hi there,
I’ve been following your NYC posts for a while now, loving the rare glimpse you offer behind the locked doors of these beautiful relics that stand as monuments to a bygone era. I have longed to see inside these buildings and walk where others have walked a century past. With your photos and posts, I feel I can at least have a privileged peak at the secrets that lay hidden there.
Though I have never commented, this is all so close to my heart, I thought I would take a moment to weigh in. I agree with you 100% and it pains me to see the history of our Grand Dame city in jeopardy. What is sad to me, is that it was ever allowed to get to this point in the first place. We should have been taking care of these jewels all a long so that it never becomes something dangerous to begin with… but alas I realize that is not practical or financially feasible and the owners of these buildings were business persons with a bottom line.
Unlike our European counterparts, it is our way in this country to discard, abandon or destroy those things that cease to serve our purpose. But these structures are our stone castles. They have their own purpose now. They are our vital link to the past and pay homage to the quality and craftsmanship that built this great country. And they need to continue to stand as a reminder of not just what came before but what could be yet again. These buildings, even in their dilapidated state may perhaps inspire a new generation of architects and craftsmen.
Perhaps even now there is an eleven year old boy and a ten year old girl standing in front of the old bank building on Coney Island, gazing up at the facade dreaming of what it could be. Perhaps they turn to each other and make a pact that when they grow up, they will buy this building and restore it and make it their own.
“But what if they tear it down?” the boy asks.
“Then we will build another one just like it,” answers the girl.
And maybe, just maybe, one of these future brilliant young architects so inspired by the past, is one of the Shouting Lady’s children.
Perhaps such inspiration, provided by our country’s standing history, is just as vital to the future of our children as safety and security.
Native Houstonian here … and though it smarts a little to see my hometown used as an example of a place that totally ignores its history, you’re exactly right. I’m afraid the attitude of “this is old, so it has to go” is getting more and more pervasive, because it’s the easy way out — simply demolishing everything that stands in your way means developers and architects don’t have to think. And when you look at what’s being built to replace the wonderful historic architecture, it’s clear that little, if any, thought has gone into it.
I see one of the biggest architectural ironies every day in the center of downtown Houston. In a block where most of the historic buildings have been razed and replaced with mediocre new stuff, there’s a piece of public art with an inscription paraphrasing John Ruskin: “As we build our city, let us think that we are building forever.” His full quote is one I wish we would think about more:
“Therefore, when we build, let us think that we build for ever. Let it not be for present delight, nor for present use alone; let it be such work as our descendants will thank us for, and let us think, as we lay stone on stone, that a time is to come when those stones will be held sacred because our hands have touched them, and that men will say as they look upon the labour and wrought substance of them, ‘See! this our fathers did for us.’”
This just makes me sick. Coney Island (at least Joe Sitt-head’s portion of it) will end up becoming another sterile, pre-fab Times Square without a semblance of character or history. I love Coney Island precisely BECAUSE it’s a time capsule of New York’s wild past. If they continue with this rape of our heritage, I will NEVER, EVER patronize a single one of the businesses in Thor/Sitt-owned buildings. (Yes, I know this would probably just hurt those businesses, but I don’t know of any other way to make a stand short of handcuffing myself to the building and getting pepper-sprayed.)
I live less than 10 minutes from Coney Island, and, to answer the woman’s question, I take my kids there all the time. And I point out to them all of the unique and interesting historical places to be found there.
The Coney Island of today is no idyllic, sterile Disneyland, but it is head-and-shoulders a better place than it was when I was a kid there in the 70s. The water at the beach is swimmable again, and the sand is kept in good order. The amusement parks still sparkle. The Cyclones’ ball park has done wonders for the neighborhood, and the quality of associated businesses. The new subway terminal is wonderful. AND THERE IS ALWAYS NATHANS!
I’m proud to take my kids there, and will be prouder still as Coney Island continues to renew itself. What this woman misses is that the possibility of getting these old buildings refurbished is not zero. It will only be zero if people don’t speak up, and call Sitt on his misguided demolition plans. If we stand up and be counted, these buildings can be refurbished and made part of the new Coney Island. I work in the historic Flatiron Building, and 10 years ago, it was a mess. The hyrdaulic elevators barely worked, and the facade was a soot-stained mess. Today, after much work, we have very good elevator service, and a sparkling clean facade. It can be done, and it should be done in Coney Island.
But, if people want to praise Sitt for his ignorant and selfish outlook on the neighborhood that is OUR playground, we are doomed, and Coney Island will lose everything that makes it special. We’ve already lost a massive chunk of downtown Brooklyn to Ratner. Why should we suffer the same fate under Sitt?
It is really a shame that such nice historical building is to be demolished. I have to agree with Monica Burns that people in USA often prefer profitability than historic value. Many old abandoned buildings with historical value in Europe are being transfered to Shopping malls what makes them interesting for the potential investors. Why not do the same with the buildings in Historic District.
I have no personal feelings about this project. I’m not a native New Yorker, and honestly, have never been to Coney Island. But I am a lover of history. Of old buildings and of what they represent.
I’m also a practical person and a realist.
While I can appreciate the opinions and views of those who want to demolish and rebuild for the sake of economic renewal, I still think it is wrong that a building, built so long ago, historically significant and still structurally sound,should simply be tossed by the wayside and razed in the name of economic development or renewal.
There has to be a compromise somewhere. Surely, someone can come up with a plan to refurbish these magnificent structures of the past and make them beacons of the present, and more importantly, the future.
Sure, it will take more time, and of course, more money, to do so. And there will not be short-term benefits, at least not financially, but the end result would be a legacy — for the city, for Coney Island, and for those who put their weight (and their money) behind it.
Our future is built upon our past, and upon the backs of our ancestors. These buildings are a testament to that.
Obviously, I am a lover of old buildings. Of their history, their magnitude, their fortitude and their perseverance.
I hope that somehow, the powers that be in this situation will see that it is in their best interest, and in the best interest of future generations and of America, to keep these ‘behemoths’ and to find ways to successfully restore them to their former glory so that they can be enjoyed by generations to come. Even if it is not in the best interest of the next fiscal year’s bottom line.
as an architect, and a lover of old buildings as well as a few new ones, I agree with Neen and Scout, there are some buildings that make one want to fight harder to keep them around, often for a sense of history, scale, and quality which is lost when areas are demolished for all-new construction. I tend to prefer gut-renovation where possible to make it work financially and functionally, and in Coney Island there are multiple possiblities to renew and re-purpose existing structures, while interspersing great new ones like the expanded subway station, and some of the beach bathhouses.Having gone to Coney Island on and off since 1962, I have great memories of old, as well as new, elements incorporated into the surrounding palimpsest of architectural, spatial & graphic imagery.I missed the original fantasyland structures of the previous century, but enjoyed the incursion of the Mermaid Parade in the 80′s, and the various incarnations of the Aquarium, as well as the timeless, splintery, boardwalk surrounded by carny arcades & rides. Valuing old does not preclude welcoming new, but it can be the balance we seek, not either extreme.
look at how nice asberry park nj is now it took years look at venus beach ca great place let things happen to coney island it needs alot of help there are too many empty lots with buses broken down buildings let things happen