Tis the season to be jolly, but there won’t be any fa-la-la-ing in good ol’ Coney Island this week. Last Wednesday, notices from attorneys for Luna Park operator Central Amusement International (CAI) were posted on the gates of the evicted Boardwalk businesses summoning them to court on December 10. CAI has retained the law firm of Davidoff, Malito & Hutcher, who filed a lawsuit to force the Coney Island 8 to “surrender the subject premises.” The eight businesses are Ruby’s, Cha Cha’s, Paul’s Daughter, Grill House, Gyro Corner, Shoot the Freak, Beer Island and Coney Island Souvenir Shop.
On Friday, Thor Equities demolition crew gutted the first floors of the Shore Hotel and the Bowery side of the Henderson Building. The dirty work will continue this week. Along with the demolished Bank of Coney Island, these historic buildings were doomed by the City’s rezoning of the parcels for high-rise hotels in 2009. A demolition permit was issued to Thor Equities in August and the Henderson’s remaining tenants were evicted, though a hotel is not expected to be built anytime soon. If you come to Coney Island for the New Year’s Day Polar Bear Swim, when you exit Stillwell Terminal and look across Surf, it’s likely the buildings will be demolished by then. What you’ll see is another empty lot to add to real estate speculator Joe Sitt’s collection of empty lots in Coney Island.
Will Ruby’s Bar be open on New Year’s Day? The Sarrels hope so, we hope so, but nobody knows. The future of the eight Boardwalk businesses will be the subject of legal wrangling this week, both behind the scenes and in court on Friday. According to the notice from CAI’s attorneys, copies of which were also sent by certified mail, “a hearing at which you must appear will be held at the Civil Court of the City of New York, 141 Livingston Street, Part 52, Room 94(C) on December 10 at 10 am.” (Update: The room number has been changed. We were requested not to post the new room number since the court date may not be open to the public.)
The notice also stated that “the license premises are an integral part of redevelopment” and that “time is of the essence.” Respondents were told to “surrender the subject premises” or face penalties of $2,000 per day. The previous notice to quit by November 19th, which ATZ posted last month, is referenced in the document. Central Amusement International states that the sublease with the businesses commenced on January 25, 2010 and ended on October 31, 2010.
We hope some kind of agreement can be reached to allow indigenous Mom & Pops such as Ruby’s and Paul’s Daughter to be part of the new Coney Island. The sudden notice to “vacate the premises” sent to the Boardwalk veterans on the day after the season ended calls to mind Thor Equities’ Christmas Eve lockout of 2008, when Joe Sitt was dubbed “The Grinch Who Stole Christmas” by the NY Post. In that infamous incident, Sitt’s henchmen cut locks on Boardwalk businesses and hung up banners advertising Stores for Lease. Lynn Kelly, then president of the Coney Island Development Corporation, told the Post, ‘Sitt’s behavior shows why the mayor’s planned rezoning is needed, “so that the boardwalk businesses and all of Coney Island have a chance to thrive.'”
Just days before CAI’s “vacate the premises” notice was delivered to the Coney Island 8 on November 1st, Kelly left her longtime position with the CIDC and NYCEDC (Economic Development Corporation) for a new job as CEO of Staten Island’s Snug Harbor Cultural Center. Too bad we’ll never get to hear Kelly’s explanation for the eviction of the Boardwalk businesses by Luna Park, which is a public private partnership with the EDC and Kelly was fond of calling “her park.” Neither the EDC nor the Mayor’s Office will comment to the press about the Mom & Pop businesses booted off City-owned property in Coney Island. The NYCEDC leased the Boardwalk property to CAI, the New Jersey-based operator of Coney Island’s new Luna Park. City officials–both appointed and elected–continue to distance themselves from responsibility for the evictions by remaining silent and referring all requests for comment to CAI.
UPDATE… December 9, 2010
Friday morning’s 10 a.m. court date for the eviction of the “Coney Island Eight” reportedly got postponed at the request of their attorney. ATZ was told that a postponement is a basic move at the beginning of a case. We’re not reading anything into it. Not yet. Stay tuned for new date.
UPDATE… December 10, 2010
The judge adjourned the hearing till January 10, 2011.
Related posts on ATZ…
November 21, 2010: Goodbye (Or Maybe Not?) to My Coney Island Equivalent of Proust’s Madeleine
November 1, 2010: Out With the Old in Coney Island: Only 2 of 11 Boardwalk Businesses Invited Back
April 21, 2010: Thor’s Coney Island: Tattered Tents, Deathwatch for Historic Buildings
January 2, 2010: Photo Album: Coney Island Boardwalk, New Year’s Day 2010
Nobody should “distance themselves” from the idea of rebuilding Coney Island. Having lived there 45 years, i’m tired of filthy, rundown businesses with drunks and lowlives inhabiting them. I’m tired of my neighborhood having to keep these businesses, while rich Manhattanites come once, say “how cute”, and go back to their fancy neighborhood. I hate outsiders fighting to keep my neighborhood looking like a slum. Why don’t we put the businesses in their neighborhood, and export the drunks there too.
I will be there when the wrecking balls come, delighted that after all these years, the boardwalk will have classy restaurants, bars, entertainment. Coney Island should not be synonymous with filth, tables you stick to, public urination, etc. Coney Island should represent clean, modern, ocean-front entertainment.
Dave, I don’t think the places we are talking about saving on the boardwalk fall into the category you mentioned. There is no reason why “clean, modern, ocean-front entertainment’ can not co-exist with Coney’s Historical Past.
Thanks Trica for being a go-to place for info not available elsewhere.
And once the boardwalk is upscaled, the neighborhood will be next. Those big chain restaurants won’t want to be in a slum neighborhood. The poor can and will be pushed out. Don’t think it will happen? How do you think those projects got built in the first place? Slums were torn down and the people in them had to be put somewhere they wouldn’t be seen. You’re next unless you show them that the old and new can and SHOULD be allowed to co-exsist.
Nothing wrong with the neighborhood being upscaled. How come nobody fights Park Slope on “upscaling the neighborhood”…. Just another example of “not in my neighborhood”. Like I said, when the wrecking balls come, I intend to be there cheering.
I’ll tell you what, why don’t all you people commenting fight for rundown dirty setups in your own neighborhood? Put up or shut up. Put a Cha Cha’s up next to your place of residence, complete with the lowlifes. Won’t happen because you’re all NOT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD hypocrites.
Is it possible for the public to attend AND SPEAK at the December 10 hearing? Thanks.
Hi Beth. sorry I don’t know. I’m not familiar with court procedures
in situations like this, it would probably be best to contact the organization or institution directly. In this case the Civil Court of NY
@Dave P: I live in Manhattan, but I’m hardly rich (I have a rent-stabilized apartment.) I’ve been going to Coney Island in the spring and summer since I moved here in 1993. I spent most of my time at the boardwalk, Ruby’s and Cha Cha’s specifically. And yeah, there’s drunk people in there, but do you really think there won’t be drunk people in a sports bar? Also, while I’m not rich I do spend money not only on the boardwalk, but in restaurants and places beyond in the neighborhood. If they tear those places down, I’m not coming back and my money stays in Manhattan. Multiply that by a lot of people and it’s not going to be so pretty. I’m not saying don’t bring in new business, just leave some of the old as well.
And I would love it, if they could transport the entire boardwalk to my neighborhood.
ATZ now has a written “Comment Policy” (posted on the About page) because this post and a couple of others have attracted comments which we as the site owner decline to publish for one or more of the reasons mentioned below…
Dear readers, thank you for your comments and e-mails. All comments are moderated by ATZ, the blog owner and publisher. Intelligent, thoughtful and witty comments are always welcome, whether or not the commenter agrees with ATZ’s point of view. Comments that spam, flame, harass, defame, libel, attack or incite violence will NOT be posted.