Southern Brooklyn

Congressman Jeffries Joins Fight Against Oceana Bathrooms Ahead Of Tonight’s Public Hearing

Look at all those gangbangers (Source: NYC Parks)
Look at all those gangbangers (Source: NYC Parks)

Congressman Hakeem Jeffries is the latest elected official to enter the fray over the new bathrooms slated for the Riegelmann Boardwalk in Brighton Beach, which residents of the Oceana condominium complex have vocally opposed.

Jeffries is on the boardwalk today holding a press conference, calling for the Parks Department to forever abandon its plans to place the bathrooms in Brighton Beach, officially dubbed the New Brighton Comfort Station. That would leave the next nearest public restroom on the boardwalk more than seven blocks away.

Oceana residents opposed the placement of the bathrooms, saying the 20-foot-tall structure would impede their oceanfront views, attract drug dealing gangbangers, and create a bad scent.

Jeffries joins Assemblyman Steven Cymbrowitz and Senator Charles Schumer in siding with Oceana residents. It was also an issue in the recent City Council race, where opposition was embraced by candidates including David Storobin and Ari Kagan.

The last we checked in on the story, city officials suffered a setback when a Brooklyn Supreme Court judge ordered that the agency produce an environmental impact study and scoping process, which includes a public hearing that will take place tonight (details below).

None of the other three comfort station on the Brighton Beach – Coney Island boardwalk, nor any of the other 10 locations throughout New York City, are being subjected to the same process. That’s because the type of project doesn’t typically trigger the state requirement for an environmental impact statement when building in a coastal erosion hazard area –  a requirement that, somewhat ironically, Cymbrowitz had sought to strike down for all future projects. He said these bathrooms changed his mind.

The Parks Department released their draft scope statement for the environmental study a few weeks ago. In it, they unsurprisingly determined that the proposed comfort station would have no significant impact on a slew of areas, including socioeconomic conditions, community facilities and services, waste and sanitation services, energy, air quality, public health and more. In fact, they found that it provided benefit in some of these areas.

Due to the court case, the statement says, the agency will also assess the comfort station’s impact on several additional areas, including urban design and visual resources, natural resources, neighborhood character and hazardous materials. Tonight’s meeting is an opportunity for the public to comment on the scope of the study.

If you have thoughts about the comfort station and its impact on the community, whether for or against, attend tonight’s public hearing at the Shorefront YM-YWHA (3300 Coney Island Avenue) from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

UPDATE (3:06 p.m.): Moments after publishing this piece, the following flier landed in my inbox. Apparently this is being distributed around Oceana.



Comment policy


  1. Ned lives in Oceana after all ??? These flyers where hang on the lobby of each Oceana building, and not distributed elsewhere.

  2. Yep. That’s how I get all the big scoops. All the specific apartments we’ve mused about the decoration of are actually owned by me. Don’t you all feel silly now…

  3. Ned, we have other news in Brooklyn which do not involve Oceana residents or for a change Russian community.
    “Newborn baby found abandoned in Sheepshead Bay”

  4. Police say the child’s mother was located at Coney Island
    Hospital. (12:53 PM)

    BROOKLYN – A newborn baby was found abandoned in the middle of the night in a
    stroller in Sheepshead Bay.

    Officials say the 1-month-old was discovered alone on East 9th Street and
    Avenue V at around 1 a.m.

    The infant was taken to Coney Island Hospital where he was said to be in good
    health and handed over to ACS custody.

    Read More: Brooklyn Top

    According to police, the child’s mother was located at the same hospital, but
    they would not say what she was being treated for.

    The mom has not been charged at this time, and the investigation is ongoing.

  5. Yes they were distributed in places other than the Oceana! Just another of your lies about a convience that was around before the Oceana was built and needs to be placed right where it was!!!

  6. There were bathrooms there before, there should be bathrooms now. So much for these politicians being “for the common person”. The common person should pee on Jeffries, Cymbo, and Schumer, because we have no bathroom to go to.

  7. Didn’t you guys know? Ned’s just been slandering the Oceana as part of his scheme to drive his rent down so he can afford a second solid gold shower head for his guest bathroom.

  8. You are right, it should be a bathroom. But what kind of bathroom?Monsters for 6 millions of taxpayers money that are ugly and dangerous? The Oceana site bathroom is the only one of many that were built without any impact study or public hearing process. I also agree with your statement about elected officials siting with “the common person”. Elected officials should be up in arms long time ago when the proposal came in place. They should be working for each and every resident of community not only those who can afford fighting. There are still old bathrooms on boardwalk perfectly working when new ones were not functioning at all. Just waste of taxpayers money as many other projects. Enough! Government works for the people not the opposite way. And everyone should be protected. If there is no bathroom in front Oceana, I want no bathroom in front of Brighton 1st Road building also.

  9. The people at Oceana don’t give a rat’s ass about what people living at Brighton 1st Road might have to contend with. But if it helps their case to get other people excited, all the merrier.

    Do the new bathrooms work? The ones I inspected did.

  10. The new elevated bathrooms are beautiful, I used the new one that was open towards Coney Island several times.
    Residents of the Oceana, here this: if there is no bathroom there, I and many others will simply climb into those shrubs right near your precious building, and relieve ourselves there. It is a simple climb down from the boardwalk. I am not walking all the way to Brighton 4th because of your snobbery. In fact, I think I will take my dog down there as a protest. That’s my response to you and your environmental study.

  11. How much money did Cymbrowitz take under the table to “change his mind”? Or maybe it was a table raised above ground.

  12. “Government works for the people not the opposite way”. How true! And who is opposing people who own public beach to improve their living conditions by updating the bathrooms? Owners of Oceana apartments! See – everything is correct. Government is doing what people who elected them want it to do and do not care about people who oppose it.

  13. Finally owners of Ocean spelled out their true reasons for all to see:
    1. oppose government decision
    2. their own view of the sunset
    3. their own smell of beach breeze
    4. value of their own apartments
    5. their own private access to public beach
    6. them using public beach as their private – without any other people on it
    7. look of worship from their children and grandchildren

    So, where are the needs of every other person who owns this public beach – including me?..

  14. It’s very funny to see the Oceana residents complaining about the new public bathrooms obstructing their water views. When the Oceana condos were being built, the Seacoast Towers residents complained that the new construction will take away their beach views entirely. Which is has, along with an entire row of private parking spots. Sorry Oceana, I guess karma’s a ….

  15. What are talking about? Who said we do not need a bathroom? I just believe that it could be some kind of better design and better process. If you or your family has to face the monster every day from your window, you would be as furious as Oceana people. Also the question about safety still remains open. We need a bathroom between Brighton 2 and Brighton 15. We need it to prevent public beach becoming a public bathroom, but we need something that is not ugly, is not dangerous and is not out of character. Boardwalk is a landmark and should be treated this way. Period! And BTW not every government decision is right.

  16. Money talk, bs walks. Taking into consideration how much money Oceana residents donated to sponsor their legal team (which contains some attorneys living in Oceana’s waterfront penthouses and/or apartments), you can rest assured that we would fight tooth and nail to prevent these bathrooms from being built .

    What have Seacoast residents done to protect their parking spots ? What are they doing about the infamous bathrooms that affect them just much ??? They rely on Ocean to deal with the toilets, clean the street between Oceana and Seacoast that pedestrians use to get to the beach, they use the parks in front of Oceana that Oceana built and continues to maintain, ect. So cry me a f***g river about those suckers.

  17. Personally, I despise public bathrooms but I acknowledge there is a need for them for the public (public being NOT the residents of Oceana, Seacoast etc. who have their own bathrooms steps away) I think it’s unfair to not provide the public with these bathrooms especially for senior citizens or families with young children who cannot walk 10 minutes to the west end bathrooms. My problem with the Oceana Property Owners sign is (1)They are upset about strangers urinating PRIVATELY in a public bathroom and the increased smell? Can’t be as bad as all the residents who let their dogs publicly urinating and defecating on all over the Brighton streets and leave it for everyone to smell and step in. (2)Fear of meeting a drunk? You got to be kidding me. Don’t we see that already when people are leaving the restaurants along the boardwalk on Friday or Saturday nights or kids walking back from Coney Island but no, blame it on the bathrooms. (3)The bathrooms are disrupting the private access to the beach? Sounds obnoxious and if you really wanted a
    private beach, you shouldn’t have bought an apartment in Brooklyn. PS I am a long time resident of Seacoast and I do not have the same feeling of entitlement towards the beach as the Oceana sign suggests. I am for the bathrooms and for equal treatment of the public and their need to enjoy the beach like I do.

  18. Maybe Oceana should just let beach goers use the bathrooms there- simple solution- no building, permits or expense required- we can all just rush to the laundry room in Oceana to do our whizzing!

  19. There is no laundry room in Oceana Coocoo, u must be mistaking a high-profile condo development with the projects the majority of haters on this site live in. Truly ignorance is bliss my Gosh!!!

Comments are closed.