Fresh Intrigue Over Carroll Gardens Homeless Shelter


The City’s Department of Homeless Services and the Coalition for Carroll Gardens are fighting over whether or not a temporary restraining order was issued concerning the proposed homeless shelter at 165 West 9th Street, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle reported.

“The petitioner’s application for a temporary restraining order (TRO) was denied,” Heather Janik, Press Secretary at DOHS told the Brooklyn Eagle via email on November 29…That was news to the petitioner, the Coalition for Carroll Gardens, which was celebrating the approval of the restraining order. Steven Miller, chair of the Coalition for Carroll Gardens said the group was amazed at the Department of Homeless Service’s statement.”

The judge did, in fact, issue a temporary restraining order, according to the Eagle, which “prohibits the city and its contractors from ‘using the building in violation of applicable laws and requirements.’” The DHS spokeswoman said in an email that the judge’s order “merely says that the City can’t use the building in violation of any laws, which of course the City would not do.” In response, Miller said, “The City is being dishonest in its position claiming that no TRO was not granted.” A hearing on CCG’s application for a preliminary injunction will take place tomorrow. CCG contends that the proposal to house 170 homeless men at the site would violate the building’s certificate of occupancy, which allows only 30 residents. The ten-unit apartment building has never been occupied because of problems with the Department of Buildings.
Restraining Order Intrigue Clouds Fate of Homeless Shelter [Brooklyn Eagle]
Breaking: Court Blocks Carroll Gardens Homeless Shelter [Brownstoner]
Controversial Carroll Gardens Homeless Shelter Opens [Brownstoner]
Pols, Angry Residents Confront Homeless Shelter Execs [Brownstoner]
Photo by Pardon Me For Asking

3 Comment

  • daveinbedstuy

    I’m sure DHS thinks they are above the law, like NYCHA

  • HookUm

    I think “intrigue” is overstating it. Part of the adversarial process is to play the media, as both sides are doing. The facts are (1) broad injunctive relief is sought; (2) rather than issue broad temporary relief, the court struck out all language but “using the building in violation of applicable laws and requirements” which is rather meaningless if there is no finding that they are currently violating the law; and (3) there will be a hearing tomorrow on the issue of further relief.

  • Using empty/unsold condos as homeless shelters is a great use of space, rather than warehousing them until sold. Every neighborhood has to contribute and help the less fortunate, it should not matter if you’re Carroll Gardens, Greenpoint or Upper East Side.