Edited by: TJVNews.com

In a consequential vote that could reshape the future of Coney Island’s iconic shoreline, the New York City Council on Monday approved a controversial rezoning proposal to clear the way for a massive casino and resort complex dubbed “The Coney.” As reported by Brooklyn Paper on Tuesday, the 36-11 vote—with four abstentions—marks a pivotal moment in a fierce battle between deep-pocketed developers and an impassioned local community determined to protect the cultural identity of the “People’s Playground.”

The rezoning allows developer Thor Equities, led by CEO Joe Sitt, to demap a portion of Bowery Street and purchase air rights above existing streets and buildings—clearing the path for three high-rise towers, some reaching up to 402 feet in height, and two expansive pedestrian bridges to stretch across Stillwell Avenue and West 12th Street. The proposed casino, if ultimately licensed by the state, would sit on over 1.3 million square feet, and include a 500-room hotel, retail space, a convention center, and 1,500 parking spots.

“This is a project that promises transformation,” said Melissa Gliatta, COO of Thor Equities, in a statement shared with Brooklyn Paper. “We now move one step closer to fulfilling a promise of economic transformation for Coney Island that includes the creation of thousands of jobs and a $200 million locally led community trust fund.”

But the vote was not a green light for construction—only a necessary prelude. As Brooklyn Paper has underscored in its detailed coverage, The Coney must still secure one of three downstate casino licenses currently under consideration by the New York State Gaming Facility Location Board. The final decision is expected by year’s end.

For supporters of the project, the appeal is largely economic. The development team projects 4,000 union construction jobs and 4,500 permanent jobs, along with a proposed $15 million annual fund for local emergency services and the aforementioned $200 million Community Trust earmarked for neighborhood investments.

At a January hearing before Community Board 13, local resident Joseph Watson delivered an impassioned defense of the project, emphasizing the needs of public housing residents and renters in the area.

“My ‘yes’ to The Coney is for the investments in our community,” Watson said, according to Brooklyn Paper. “I’m talking about the kids and the young men and women that live in NYCHA. These people, my people, we need an opportunity.”

Even Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, after initial hesitation, issued conditional support in March—though he insisted that labor protections, traffic mitigation, and community investment be spelled out clearly.

Still, vocal and organized opposition to the casino has not abated. Among the most vehement critics is Coney Island USA, the arts and culture nonprofit that houses the Coney Island Museum, Circus Sideshow, and the Freak Bar—as well as the stewards of the famed Mermaid Parade. If the casino were to be built, it would rise directly above the organization’s headquarters on Surf Avenue.

Speaking to Brooklyn Paper, Adam Rinn, artistic director of Coney Island USA, did not mince words:

“This is not a project that is here to help; this is a project that is set to destroy… We have over 20,000 signatures opposing this casino project. And the nerve, the nerve of these electeds to not take that into consideration.”

Rinn and others view the casino as a thinly veiled attempt to commodify the area’s character, threatening longstanding small businesses and displacing culturally rich institutions. While the proposal has taken pains not to touch Luna Park or Deno’s Wonder Wheel, critics argue the surrounding area will become unrecognizable—dominated by glass towers and high-stakes tourism, rather than family outings and local heritage.

“This isn’t about helping Coney Island,” Rinn added. “It’s about extracting value from it.”

Council Member Justin Brannan, who represents the district, voted in favor of the rezoning, though he was careful to frame the decision as procedural rather than final.

“It is my responsibility to ensure that all stakeholders have the opportunity to make their voices heard on this matter through the Community Advisory Committee process mandated by New York State,” Brannan told Brooklyn Paper. “Then all of the local elected officials can make a decision collectively.”

Brannan’s vote—while expected—did not land without criticism. Opponents argue that his support gives a powerful tailwind to a project that has been overwhelmingly rejected at the community level. In January, Community Board 13 voted overwhelmingly against the rezoning, a move echoed by Council Member Inna Vernikov, whose district includes Brighton Beach. Vernikov voted “no” on the rezoning, telling Brooklyn Paper:

“This demapping makes the casino application and proposed development more likely to take place… it has become clear that a majority in the community do not want a casino in Coney Island.”

Eleven council members, including progressive voices like Shahana Hanif and Chi Ossé, also voted against the plan, offering some hope to opponents that the project may yet falter if the license is not granted.

Though the City Council’s approval marks a major milestone, it does not seal the fate of the casino. Each casino proposal must be reviewed by a Community Advisory Committee (CAC), composed of six individuals appointed by local and state officials. According to Brooklyn Paper, each CAC must hold two public hearings and vote by September 30. Only proposals receiving at least two-thirds support from their respective CACs will move forward to final evaluation by the Gaming Facility Location Board.

If The Coney’s bid is denied, the rezoning will be reversed, and developers will not be permitted to construct alternative non-casino high-rises. In other words, no license, no towers—a point emphasized repeatedly by opponents as a failsafe against irreversible damage.

As the report in Brooklyn Paper noted, the fate of the casino is far from sealed. For now, the fight for Coney Island’s future continues in courtrooms, committee meetings, and community halls.

“This is not over,” said Rinn. “We hope the people of this city will stand behind us. We hope that the electeds will see the support we’re getting—and that they’ve been ignoring.”

Whether The Coney becomes a beacon of economic revival or a cautionary tale of overdevelopment depends on the months ahead. But what remains clear, as Brooklyn Paper has documented in depth, is that the stakes are no longer just architectural or economic—they are existential. The soul of Coney Island, many believe, is on the table.