« Friday Links Mill Building Gets TCO; Closings in 30 Days »
May 11, 2007
City Fishing for Jail Block Developers
Trying to soften the blow of sticking the newly revitalized community with another 700 to 800 inmates, the city is testing the waters with developers to gauge interest in erecting two 10-15 story residential buildings with ground floor retail on the back side of the jail along Boerum Place and State Street. (Boerum Place runs along the foreground of this photo; State Street recedes back into the photo.) If the developers don't bite, the city will just build something else. “There’s no preference for residential, but we certainly wanted to test the market to see what the developers thought,” said Jennifer K. Friedman, a vice president in the city’s Economic Development Corporation, which is soliciting the responses. "It’s absurd to take an obsolete building and sink more taxpayer money into it,” said Sandy Balboza, president of the Atlantic Avenue Betterment Association. At this rate, Sandy may have to worry about a rival neighborhood group springing up: How does the Atlantic Avenue Detriment Association sound? Does anyone remember how much taxpayer money is going to be spent on this effort at making criminals' lives more convenient? On the other hand, the neighborhood really could use some more places to get bail bonds. People are getting really tired of restaurants and clothing boutiques. They are so 2006.
City Tests Idea of Building Apartments by Brooklyn Jail [NY Times]
City Eyes Unlocking Brooklyn Jail [Metro]
Change in 'Store' at B'klyn Jail [NY Post]
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1153
Comments
What kind of retail would they have? A locksmith perhaps?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:16 AM
"Does anyone remember how much taxpayer money is going to be spent on this effert at making criminals' lives more convenient?"
That ranks up there as one of the most stupidist things I have ever read on the brownstoner website. Taxpayer money is being spent on making the criminal justice system more fair. It is being built so that public defendants, who already ridiculously overburdened, don't have to waste their entire day traveling to Ryker's island. Which means that a lot of the time they simply can't go to meet with their clients.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:31 AM
I know it's not news, but DAMN.
The possibility of reopening always sucked, but to make it even bigger? Sucks AND blows.
Why can't the city build a new jail in a crappier area?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:32 AM
Should be OK, as long as no part of the jail is OVER the commercial or residential space. I worked for the Queens DA, whose main office space is adjacent to the Queens House of Detention. My office, for a time, was in a ground floor space, with part of the jail above it. The prisoners would stop up the toilets so that they'd leak through to the offices below. I suppose they had a sense of humor and delighted in s**ting on those who had a part in putting them behind bars. I suspect they'd delight in doing the same to yuppies :-)
Posted by: Bob Marvin at May 11, 2007 9:34 AM
smoke shop, porn, organic grocery
Its not about making prisoner's lives better but controlling city infrastructure costs. Maybe the city can force SUV owners to carpool with defendants in transit to court hearings?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:35 AM
I think kinda snarky comment - and misleading to say this is being done to make crinals lives more convenient.
The jail or house of detention is adjacent to criminal court building. Otherwise we are spending countless hours transporting people back and forth from Rikers.
And also keep in mind - they are not all convicted - just charged.
Do you even notice or realize when you are walking by Manhattan House of Detention that it is jail. Is it such a 'detriment'?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:42 AM
Stoner dude, you're way off the mark here. 1) Jail was here before everyone else. Wishing it away won't change that.
2) More important - jail was here because courts were here. Would you like to move those away too?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:48 AM
From the Metro article...“We will also be...bringing the people in our custody closer to their families and the communities they come from,” DOC Commissioner Martin Horn said in a statement.
Posted by: Brownstoner at May 11, 2007 9:53 AM
Let's see. 5 blocks east is a perfrectly nice neighborhood that the State is going to demolish because it's blight. Here there's real blight that the government would like to expand. Thank you Mayor + Governor Orwell.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:54 AM
How many inmates are from Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, or Brooklyn Heights, the neighborhoods closest to the jail?
Sell the jail, make some dough, and relocate that eyesore to an area that makes more sense.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:56 AM
Orwell? Seriously?
And Stoner, I'm surprised that a sharp, well-educated mind like yours takes a public official's pronouncements at face value - DOC wants jail here because the jail's here, and it's the easiest thing to do.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 9:59 AM
Yes, how convenient. When all the owners of brownstones on Columbia Heights are in the clinker for the night for getting caught with coke in the BMW's, it'll be so much easier for Muffy and little Carter to come visit!
Posted by: Anon at May 11, 2007 9:59 AM
Firstly, I can't imagine anyone would buy a condo attached to the jail. There is a lot of foot traffic associated with the jail - corrections, lawyers, family visitors, etc. Anyone who would buy a condo there is really desperate.
I'm neither for nor against the jail reopening, but I am totally against the overdevelopment of the area.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 10:24 AM
worst thread ever
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 10:31 AM
I am refraining from obscenities because you control these posts, Mr. Brownstoner. The current penal colony on Rikers Island (the largest in North America, if not the world) is incredibly inefficient, requiring the shuffling of detainees to five county courthouses each day. Lawyers have very little access to their clients, and jurors sit waiting around for detainees to be "produced." A criminal justice system is part of a civilized society (if I remember correctly you spent a lot of last year trying to up the arrests of drug dealers in your neighborhood - where did you think they went after the arrests?). Downtown Brooklyn is where the courts are, and so, ahem, that's where lawyers, the accused, jurors, bail bondsmen, et al, are as well. If you really think it is inappropriate for such necessary aspects of civil society to be in downtown brooklyn, maybe it is time for you all to move to the suburbs. The racism and down-right ill-will directed to the family members of the detained is really quite disgusting; they simply want to be able to visit their family members without having to take off a whole day to do so. What, your eyes are hurt by having to see a sign that says "bailbonds"? Grow up. For a guy who's only lived in Brooklyn for four years, you are mighty fast and loose with the lives of people more unfortunate than you. Shame on you. Shame.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 10:34 AM
I live near some projects and boy are they an eyesore! Even worse, the people who live there aren't locked up, so they just walk around the neighborhood whenever they feel like it! TERRIBLE for property values! I hope that after we move the jail to a yucky neighborhood where none of us want to live (yet) we can move the projects there, too!
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 10:44 AM
Just so you're all aware - the 'real' Criminal Court Building is no longer adjacent to the jail.
The State (Ratner-btw) built a new building for Criminal/Supreme/Family next to the Marriot. Currently the old Criminal Court Building is being used for Arraignments and I believe will be used for Grand Juries at some point.
I believe this will mean that prisoners will still need to be transported by vehicle to the Courts.
Given the value of the land it might make more $ sense to put the Jail in a less expensive area (like industrial section of Gowanus for example) and sell the existing plot.
Posted by: David at May 11, 2007 10:44 AM
"The racism"...come off it. This is probably the third post in as many days where somebody tries to play the race card.
I agree with 10:31 if you're willing to buy a condominium attached to a jail then something ain't quite right.
Lived in the area (in fact right across the street) for two years. Barely even noticed the precense of the jail myself. I know the city spend a god awful amount of money to build that ugly red marble montrosity on the lower level though.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 10:48 AM
I agree with Putnam-denizen. I'm a long-time reader and poster and this thread makes me ashamed to be a part of the whole Brownstoner thing. It makes me feel like I am an asshole in a community of assholes.
Let's just give up and ship all the accused to Guantanamo! Then our Brownstone lives and Smith street restaurants will remain intact!
I think we may be forgetting what really makes this country a nice place to live-- it ain't just the architecture....
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 10:49 AM
This is simple economics. Sell the existing building, pocket big bucks, build better facility elsewhere with lots of money left over for buses. It's just a bad use of government money to keep jail here and sink more into it.
Posted by: Anon at May 11, 2007 10:56 AM
why just sell the jail....why not the court building sites,, and borough hall
and while were at it city hall and gracie mansion. Put them all around JFK somewhere. The land is too valuable for such trivial pursuits.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 11:08 AM
What makes sense would be to tear the existing facility down (including the polished granite base boondoggle that was never used) and start from scratch. the new building would accomodate parking, jail, residential, and retail. It's a big lot. Combining these uses sounds outlandsih, but it could work. What will not work is the idea of building new "bookends" next to the existing monstrosity of a jail.
There is at least one precedent for a jail/apt.house combo in Manhattan. The two uses are not really all that incompatible. Think of the jail as a securety-minded co-op with very, very strict house rules.
Posted by: serge at May 11, 2007 11:18 AM
David et al make a great point. Sometimes the best thing for the overall community good is to use land for the highest and best value. Clearly we can build a nice housing development here (including some affordable units) and have plenty of money to build a new jail in an approriate isloated area of the city. Why should good citizens have to bear the additional burden of having criminals in close proximity? Why continue the crime?
Posted by: Robert at May 11, 2007 11:44 AM
Anonymous 9:59
Orwell?
Hotels + Apartment on Brooklyn Waterfront = "Park"
Occupied Residences next to land held off market by the MTA = "Blight"
Opposing AY = "Racism"
I think it is kind of Orwellian.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 11:46 AM
Having a jail next door is better than having projects next door.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 11:48 AM
I agree that I would much rather live next door to a jail than projects.
Yes, the jail is there and has been there. But losing one crappy building is not that much money compared to what Brooklyn could make by doing something else with this land. There has got to be some middle ground between Riker's and this prime location. It just seems that the city doesn't care about the potential consequences on the community enough to consider all the alternatives.
People could swallow this easier if the city explained to us why this is absolutely necessary. Trash the yuppies all you want, but they have a responsibility to those who live in the community as well as the people in their care in the jail.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 12:11 PM
Just so its clear - I have absolutely no problem with the jail where it is - as it is.
BUT
if the city is planning on sinking even more $ into this facility then I think a rational look at the economics is in order.
The City put something like 50M into the building AFTER it was closed and now wants to sink hundreds of millions more to expand it - while at the same time apparently demolishing the recent $50M of 'improvements'.
This strikes me as insanity, especially if the prisoners will still need to be transported to the courthouse (i.e. investing tons of $ into a facility that already isn't ideally suited).
Frankly if they need a new/larger jail it would make ALOT more sense building it atop the old Family Court Building and attach it to the new Criminal/Supreme Court Building - at least then you would save on (massive) transportation costs.
The current plan makes no sense - Clearly the city has some reluctance in expanding and reopening a jail in the burgeoning downtown area - so then why not at least capitalize on the increased land value and save on construction costs by building a new building in a cheaper and less residential area. (which will allow you to use the current facility in the meantime) You can be sure that retrofitting the existing structure and developing it into some kind of mixed use site will be far more expensive then simply building a dedicated jail in a nearby yet more conducive spot. (not to mention that you will have no use of the current facility for years)
BTW I also think it is absolutely ridiculous that the jail sits empty now - if the jail is needed and in fact already needs expansion - then at least open the damn thing up until at least you decide what to do.
Posted by: David at May 11, 2007 12:34 PM
I just hope they build in some parking. The police already use Smith St next to the jail as a parking lot. If you and I parked the way they do we would get towed.
Of course if we ran red lights the way they do we would get tickets, but when you have power why not abuse it?
Posted by: honus at May 11, 2007 12:38 PM
Those of us who have lived in downtown Brooklyn/Boerum Hill longer than the new experts at 53 Boerum or 110 Livingston etc. know that the jail itself has had almost no impact on the neighborhood in any real sense. Best -- the presence of court officers and police 24/7 was a crime deterent when one was needed back in the 80s. Worst, the same court officers and police use the streets as their long-term parking (cars that literally do not move for weeks at a time, and with sensitive and loud alarms on them!). Courts and the insitutions that support them (including jails) deserve to be in central urban centers with good public transportation. There is no reason that they and we cannot exist together. As much as I admire Sanday Balboza and what she and the AABA has done for the neighborhood, the two (now gone) gas stations at the south side of Atlnatic have done more to create the "dead" block than the jail. With any reasonable development there, the jail will be a non-issue.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 12:45 PM
I think the very last thing they would consider doing is moving the jail. Nobody wants a jail near them. There would be long fights with politicians and community boards wherever they would propose to relocate. Also, there is logic to having the jail near the courts and accessible to transit. This is where the jail is and where it will stay. Let's hope they do the best project possible here and not try to cut corners. parking for the officers and for families will do a lot to appease the community. A new jail that is not so hideous and blends in with downtown would be a big plus, stores and restaurants along Atlantic Ave would be a big plus. Will they do this the right way? it depends on what sort of response they get from the private development community. Here is a case where a private developer could do something great for the commnity while also making a profit.
Posted by: Serge at May 11, 2007 12:59 PM
put the jail in AY; that would be an additional public good (just adding to the humor). Who knows, it just might tip the scale.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 1:08 PM
Yes, but we don't have anywhere to get gas now. I used to have my car serviced at one of those stations.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 1:20 PM
Let's put this in context. If you move the jail (to a more "appropriate" neighborhood) you'll need all of the following:
- courthouses in the same area
- plenty of commercial space for attorneys, court reporters, bail bondsmen, and all of the other people who are required to keep the legal system running
- a full complement of public transportation so that the jurors, jailers, and citizens that need to get to the courts can actually access them
- some parking (doesn't need to be accessive, but at a minimum enough for the judges)
- some limited retail space so that all of these people have places where they can buy lunch or a cup of coffee
In my mind these are the basics. Where in Brooklyn does this magical land exist? There isn't another area that serves as a crossroad for all the subway lines and bus lines except for downtown Brooklyn. Are you all really suggesting that the courts be relocated to Canarsie, Brownsville, or Coney Island? Or perhaps that prisoners should be transported through residential neighborhoods on a daily basis so that a hot housing market isn't affected? Jails are close to courthouses for a reason. Move one and you'll need to move the other, or pay for prisioners to be transported, and deal with the reprecussions of those transfers. I usually agree with Brownstoner on issues, but I gotta say you're dead wrong on this. The fact that everyone has chosen to make the area around the courts and jail a "hot nabe" doesn't mean that justice should be relocated.
Posted by: Oh Lord! at May 11, 2007 1:27 PM
As the one who made the racism accusation, I stand by it, given the tone of many of the posts. Not one of those who propose putting the jail in some isolated part of town has addressed the needs of the court system for easy access and the ability of family members to see loved ones. Downtown Brooklyn is exactly that, downtown, with extensive transportation alternatives and proximity to where people work. I have seen similar wish to remove colored and poor folk from downtown Brooklyn in the discussions about the Fulton Street corridor and the Officer's Row. Poor people don't deserve to live where I want to live, cry the newly entitled. And then they pout that they aren't racists, why they took an Black History class at Wesleyan.
Putting every public building on the periphery of the city because a private developer would pay more money for the site for housing is assinine. Why shouldn't the public have easy access to their government and its functions? A centrally located jail can be for the community's benefit. Sometimes it isn't just about maximizing economic benefit..
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 1:35 PM
good point about the gas station. pretty soon we will need a quarter tank of gas just to drive to the nearest pump.
Posted by: Serge at May 11, 2007 1:38 PM
Putnam-denizen makes good points (except his incorrect slur of Wesleyan). The Brooklyn House of Detention is just that, NOT a jail for convicted criminals. Accused people awaiting trial now have to wait at Rikers, and family members have a huge trek to see them. It's not the rich owners of brownstones on Columbia Heights who are stuck there -- they have the money to post bond. But if you don't have alot of cash and get accused of a crime, isn't it fair not to be shipped where neither your family nor your public defendant can easily see you?
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 1:45 PM
sounds like a good idea. and a new concept: jailominiums.
Posted by: anon. at May 11, 2007 2:03 PM
sorry: I meant to slur Vassar instead.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 2:12 PM
This is an economic issue, not one of family convenience. Access to a jail where family members are awaiting trial is not a regular need for families. If it is, then that family has much more grave issues to address.
If the current location saves serious costs with respect to transporting those waiting for trial to court, and makes it easier for defendants' lawyers to get access to them, then it should stay there. However, if vehicular transportation of defendants to court is still required, why not locate the jail in a non-residential area that is still easily accessible for defendants' lawyers (and to a lesser extent, family), such as the Navy Yard near Sands Street. That location is still close to downtown Bklyn, the court buildings, accessible by bus or walking from downtown, but not on prime real estate from a commercial and residential perspective.
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 2:28 PM
To everyone that cries racism, I don't think (most) people really want to take away the rights of the people in jail and of their families, but to say that their rights should so easily trump the best interests of the community is some sort of reverse racism or classism. And it is also very hard for people to take, no matter how hard they try to believe in the 'innocent until proven guilty' fundamental of our criminal justice system.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 2:36 PM
The jail was there first, before anyone wanted to live in the vicinity. I also grew up around there and the jail was not a blight. So why shouldn't they reclaim the facility that was theirs to begin with? I'm so sick of people moving into a neighborhood just for a couple of years and then acting as if they have more rights or more say than residents who have been there for a long time.
Posted by: Matilda at May 11, 2007 2:41 PM
I agree with the poster who said that the best deterrent is to buy in a landmarked nabe. Or at least buy in a nabe with a strong and active community board. They might be incorrectly tagged as being 'nimby' and 'anti-development' but if your community board is active and your neighborhood is also landmarked, you know you'll have a better chance of controlling what pops up next door, which we all know can affect your quality of life.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 2:47 PM
LP, yes vehicular transportation is still required but if folks were housed at the Bkly House of Detention they would be 4 blocks away from the new criminal court. Much easier to deal with in cases where trials are postponed, court days end early, or if there is some other holdup in the process.
I think that the Navy Yard is a great idea, but note that the jail that had been located on Navy Street (previously used as the brig when the Navy Yard was booming) was sold to developers to become more luxury housing. Inside the yard, space is being used by industrial and light manufacturing companies that 20-30 years ago would have been located in Red Hook, on Atlantic Avenue, or along the waterfront in Sunset Park. All of that space has given way in "the best interest of the community".
Posted by: Oh Lord! at May 11, 2007 2:51 PM
So the "residents who have been there a long time" WANT a jail?
Who are these "residents", Matilda?
I grew up in area, not too far from the BHoD. I think that qualifies me as a "long time" resident, and I want the jail shuttered for good. To suggest that people actively WANT a jail in their back yard is beyond ridiculous.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 2:51 PM
"The jail was there first, before anyone wanted to live in the vicinity. I also grew up around there and the jail was not a blight. So why shouldn't they reclaim the facility that was theirs to begin with?"
Perhaps, but to expand it is a different proposition, no?
Posted by: Anon at May 11, 2007 2:55 PM
I would absolutely love the idea of living near a large, growing jail. It would just wash the stench of yuppie right off of me when I return home from the office at night.
Posted by: loaded with sarcasm at May 11, 2007 3:03 PM
So let's put the jail down out of the way on Navy Street. Let us see who lives down there... Why the projects are there. Yeah, racism has nothing to do with this conversation...(sarcastic snort).
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 3:34 PM
Putnam-Denizen, respectfully, I think your liberal guilt or otherwise personal point of view is affecting your ability to even consider what might be practical alternatives. If The Navy Yard at Sands Street was a viable alternate location (which some say it is not due to light construction currently located there) - it is currently a walled off area that is not accessible to pedestrians from the projects or northern Fort Greene, nor is it a residential or commercial hub like downtown Brooklyn currently is. it, however, is close to downtown and to public transport (buses). If there is no problem in your mind with having a jail for defendants awaiting trial in a residential neighborhood, then why would you have an issue if it was located in a non-residential area, separated by a street and a 10 foot wall from the Farragut Houses you are referring to, but still accessible by defendants' lawyers and their families. Take it easy on labeling people racists pal. You don't even know who you are talking too with your knee jerk statements.
For the record, I'm not necessarily advocating moving the jail if you read my first post, just throwing ideas out there for consideration. However if labelling people racists without foundation is your idea of discussion, then there is no use in trying to discuss this with you.
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 3:47 PM
The Navy Yard is an industrial park that is supposed to attract new businesses to Brooklyn. One of the biggest movie studios in the east coast is located there. I don't think the folks in the Yard nor in the surrounding community would take kindly to having a new jail plunked down in their neighborhood because the folks near the civic center think it is not the best and highest use for "their" precious real estate.
The best we can hope for is a new facility on the old site and not just a re-hashed 1960's era jail building.
Posted by: Serge at May 11, 2007 4:09 PM
I don't believe that everyone who wants the jail out is a racist. I think, unfortunately, that Mr. Brownstoner's initial posting reveals a great deal of disrespect for the lives of those who are either held at the House of Detention and their families. His assumption that we shouldn't care about them was stomach-turning to me, especially first thing in the morning. I guess I just haven't heard why we should move the facility at all. And why is behind a wall across the street from the Farragut Houses any less an impingement on a residential community than where it is now? it is hard for me to see that there is any difference beyond the race and economic status of those who will live next to it. Essentially the fine burgers of Brooklyn Heights/ Boerum Hill, don't want to have to see it.
Also practically, the two sites are not equally convenient, either in terms of attorney access (attorneys can walk to see clients at the Brooklyn House) or families. A subway to a bus is not the same as every subway line in the city. This has been gone over time and time again when people suggest that the Arena would be better placed exactly where you suggest the jail could be (basketball teams and prisoners should all be down by the impound lot - okay, okay, okay, that's too paranoid even for me). It simply does not have the advantages the current site has.
LP, of course I don't know you (or if you went to Vassar or Wesleyan), but since no one has pointed out a single real problem with the jail except that they would prefer not to live near it, I am left wondering whether we are just talkign about upper class sensibilities. And what are we trying to hide by banishing the jail? If we don't want to be reminded that we jail a higher percentage of our population than any other developed nation or that those imprisoned are disproportionately men of color, I guess getting rid of a jail on Atlantic Avenue is a good first step. If you don't think your specific thoughts are motivated by racism, more power to you, but if you refuse to acknowledge that racism has a part in urban planning, the allocation of resources, and the empowerment of certain economic interests over others, then you are missing a whole lot of what is going on around you. "The Court House" and other developments came to the jail, the jail didn't come to them.
P.S. I have liberal guilt about that brownie I had last night, but not about my sentiments here.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 4:10 PM
I don't think we can slight people for voicing concerns about "their" neighborhood (it is theirs if they live there Serge). I don't live in Boerum Hill btw. It might be best to leave the jail where it is, just putting ideas out there.
I am looking forward to the redevelopmetn of the Navy Yards. The part of it I'm talking about is not the Steiner Studios end, but the other end to the West near Sands Street and the crumbling buildings that formed part of Admirals Row. Maybe it wouldn't work, but I don't think redevelopment of the Navy Yard as a more vibrant industrial park and a jail facility on a small portion of the large underutilized area a necessarily mutually exclusive. Also, there are no people, as far as I know, legally living in the walled off confines of the Navy Yard. I really think it does offer the proximity to downtown and accessibility to lawyers and families people are pushing for, while having the advantage of not being in an area that is a commerical hub or residential neighborhood - nor are there plans to make the Navy Yard a residential neighborhood or a retail destination, rather it will be an industrial park under current plans. So what would be the major drawbacks? Seems like it would be a good solution to me if it did not displace jobs in the Navy Yard.
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 4:18 PM
Major drawbacks:
Not convenient to downtown
Not near the subway
Not walkable to courts
Across the street from a different (albeit darker) residential neighborhood
Conflicts with existing plans to build supermarket for aforementioned darker residential neighborhood
And yes we can fault people for voicing concerns about "their" neighborhood if it seems their motives are selfish
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 4:33 PM
No one is asking that a new jail be built smack in the middle of a residential area. The jail was there first, and only in the last few years closed. So if new jail space is needed, the most obvious solution is to re-open it. Somehow, Brooklyn Heights and Cobble Hill managed to survive all those years with the House of Detention nearby. I don't understand how many of you can throw out phrases like the city has some "responsibility" to people of that community to keep that jail closed. If you bought a house or apartment near the jail, you knew it was there, there were no promises made differently. Suggesting it would be better located near places where poorer people live is takes NIMBY to a new level.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 4:34 PM
Fair enough putnam-denizen. I just don't have an issue with people protesting a jail being built or expanded in their neighborhood, whether it is a rich neighborhood or poor one. That is why I was trying to suggest a non-residential area such as within the Navy Yards confines. I also don't think the jail where it stands poses any threat other than to property values.
I do see a real difference if the jail is within a walled compound, not adjacent to residential buildings. I'm not saying it's the answer, just a suggestion. Plus, you don't have to worry about the property value of Farragut Houses unless you want to tear them down and build something else.
As to racism playing a large part in urban planning in 2007, I disagree. Money and power play the strongest role in my opinion (whoever has money or power, or can gain in a deal, will stomp on whomever they need to regardless of their race to achieve their ends). In NYC property development, racial arguments are often used to achieve ends without regard to who ultimately gets hurt in the process (read: AY development).
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 4:35 PM
I also agree, for the record, with those who say "you bought near the jail, so deal with it". I do sympathize, however, with protests over jail expansion.
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 4:38 PM
The NY Times articles states that "City officials will decide whether those buildings would contain apartments, hotel rooms or offices."
Hotel rooms sound more plausible than condos.
Room rates at the Brooklyn Bridge Marriott are $250 and up, if available. So 10-15 stories of hotel rooms could be a real money maker for the right developer.
Posted by: Ballin' at May 11, 2007 4:43 PM
What's not mentioned in the three news articles, Stoner's intro and the 50-odd comments above is that DOC can roughly double the size of the jail 'as of right,' without going through ULURP. So, as far as DOC is concerned, the 'move it here, move it there' comments are besides the point ... DOC believes that it has already compromised.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 4:43 PM
Ultimately, the only thing that would sway the DOC would be a strong economic argument as to why they should move, otherwise, it is what it is.
Posted by: lp at May 11, 2007 4:45 PM
Even for those who bought near the jail while it was closed, those lived there while it was still open, or those who just think it would be a good area to live... Who can blame anyone for putting up a little fight and voicing their concerns!!! Even if it is just on some message blog or if it is some more formal complaint, I don't see how everybody expects people to just take it with no questions asked. You gotta stick up for yourself a little in this world.
But I'm sure everyone screaming racism or NIMBY would just keep your mouths shut even if this has an impact on your lives or that of your families, just b/c you are such good, fair people.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 4:51 PM
The as of right expansion, as 4:43 rightly points out, is another reason why the authorities would never ever, in a million years, want to move the jail. Why start that political and emotional nightmare when you have a grandfathered facility right smack where you want it to be?
The Navy Yard suggestion is so wrong on so many levels, first of all, there are plenty of residnetial blocks adjacent to the yards, secondly the fenced-in arguement would not work so well if you worked there and were inside the fence too, lastly the area at the periphery where the Admiral houses are is to be part of the greenway bike path and a much needed, much needed, big discount grocery store for the folks who live in the projects across the street and elsewhere in Fort Greene. Forget about the Navy Yard, that is as likely as moving it to Prospect Park.
Posted by: Serge at May 11, 2007 4:59 PM
I just love it how whenever anyone has a project that noone wants to live near (a jail, a power plant, a basketball arena, an incinerator, a sewage treatment plant, an impound lot, etc) someone says "Hey just put it in the Navy Yard". Yes it sounds like a good idea on the surface - noone wants to live near these things, so put it behind a wall away from residences. But it completely ignores what the needs are of those uses (need to be near public transit, etc) and also completes ignores the purpose the Navy Yard serves. The Navy Yard is one of the last places in the City where small light-industrial businesses can find affordable space without being concerned with eventually being priced out by developers who are converting the site to residential uses. While the Navy Yard is fairly large (about 300 acres) there's already 5,000 people working there and space demand for the limited unused space right for other light industrial and manufacturing businesses is very high. It would be a horrible waste to use up several acres of land to build a prison (that prisoners families could not even get to easily b/c of lack of subway) when there's a perfectly good prison building that already exists in downtown Brooklyn across from the courthouse on top of 72 subway lines. Y'all gotta start thinking about the big picture when it comes to this kind of development and not only see things through the provincial lense of how it affects your little world and start thinking about how it affects the whole city.
Posted by: Ella at May 11, 2007 5:06 PM
Ella - I agree with alot of what you said including this:"there's a perfectly good prison building that already exists in downtown Brooklyn across from the courthouse on top of 72 subway lines" - unfortunatly the City doesnt agree. Despite spending 50+ million of our dollars in the last 5 yrs or so - the City apparently feels that the jail is inadequate (despite the fact that it is 100% empty) and wants to spend hundreds of millions more to essentially demolish and rebuild the jail all over again.
My point (besides the fact that I am appalled at this massive waste of money) is that before you go throw more money into this, why not rethink which makes the most sense economically for the city. And secondly if we really need this jail space - then for goodness sake open the f'ing thing up while you decide - instead of having a 100 million dollar edifice to government waste sitting empty.
Posted by: David at May 11, 2007 5:49 PM
prisons are important in a civilized society. A hundred million dollars is well spent on a good, humane, new prison that is architecturally integrated into its urban context and does not scream out "THIS IS A JAIL".
Such a building would be feasible to build in conjunction with a hotel and residential building, with entrances on a differnt frontage than the jail intrance. This is the project we deserve and ought to demand in Downtown Brooklyn.
Posted by: Serge at May 11, 2007 7:00 PM
It isnt a prison - its a jail - there is a difference
Posted by: Annonymous at May 11, 2007 9:03 PM
Prisoners' families, good grief. It's a jail. They're awaiting trial, not serving time. By that logic, we should move Rikers to Times Square so that those serving real time, not just waiting for trial, will always be easily accessible by public transport. You guys are ridiculous. Make a valid argument, not some half cocked concern for families' convenience. Where not talking about a grocery store that will be visited regularly for a lifetime, rather a jail which, hopefully, will only have to be visited on a few rare occaisions by a family member. Once someone is found guilty, then it's off to Rikers or wherever to serve time. Again, focus on a real concern, not some BS prisoner's convenience argument. Unbelievable.
While the Navy Yard might not be the best spot if the critiques above are correct, I think the idea of a nonresidential area is a good one.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 11, 2007 11:14 PM
It's the econ 101 factor + a small scent of corruption. Why build a new jail -- when the old is perfectly situated b/w courts, attorneys {Court Street attorneys are a mere institution in these parts) and the old bail bond outposts. The City NEVER said anything about shutting down for good - so all who bought around the area are on notice about BHD re-opening. But the waste of $$ is appalling and only means one thing -- absolute corruption.
Posted by: anony at May 11, 2007 11:40 PM
11:14 - you obviously didn't read the posts if you think another site makes sense. You are the one proposing a change, so you explain why moving a jailo away from the courts, lawyers and transportation makes sense. It the cumalitive inconvenience that I am talking about, not so theoretical family who has three sons in jail and needs to go to a jail every Wednesday, I really esent the idea that my thoughts are "half cocked". Quite the contrary. Rikers is not (ogh ignorant one) where People serve "real tme" - ity is the current, inefficient location for detainees. And btw people wait from six months to two years for a trial, so we aren't talking triavial time. Just ebcause you obviously don't know any of this, doesn't amake the concern trivial. Actually the only people serving "real time" have been sent to gulags up near the Canadian border where they provide emplyment for people who vote Republican. Families need to travel for a whole day to see their loved ones. Which is a whole nother discussion. The jail serves a public purpose, like a hosptial or a school. Live with it.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 11, 2007 11:55 PM
I have worked for the NYCDOC for 20 years and very much look forward to retirement. I worked in the "Brooklyn House" in 1989 and 1990 at the height of the crack epidemic and the Brooklyn House became overcrowded. The majority of the inmates housed there were residents of BK and Staten Island and had BK and Richmond cases. The majority of the inmates in the NYCDOC today still hail from BK. I personally would not want to live next door to a jail and for that reason I did not purchase a home near a jail. Had I purchased a home near a jail, especially one undergoing renovation, I would have assumed that it would at some point reopen. With the city jail population on the rise and a renovated jail at its disposal, it would be a waste of my hard earned taxpayer money not to reopen it. Instead of the addition, another location could be scouted for another BK jail. We have now and have previously purchased barges on which we've housed inmates. The Brigg (BCF) on Flushing should not have been sold. That location was still close to the courts even though the inmates had to be put on a bus to get them there. The city is also negotiating the terms of another facility to be built in the Bronx. The jails on Rikers Island are old and falling apart. Dormitory and Sprungs were added to existing buildings to ease the overcrowding when I came on the job but these were only meant as temporary structures. Prisoner oversight agencies like the Board of Correction and the Legal Aid Society's Prisoner's Rights Project are constantly badgering the DOC when inmates rights are violated but many of the existing facilities just don't have the capacity to meet targeted goals. For example, the DOC must house inmates who have been designated as "Heat Sensitive" in units with AC and all inmates must be provided with ice water when the indoor weather rises to a certain temperature. In dormitory housing there are 2 officers to watch 120 inmates. Inmates will wait for the officer to tour one area and go and jump another inmate in another area. Of course the officer won't know who did what because many of the dorms are not well lit and have blind spots. Officers are assaulted daily due to poor jail design as well (architects never ask us what we need as far as design) The newer jails like "Manhattan House" were built with individual cells and although there are blind spots its easier to see what's going on. Except when the inmates are inside of the cells. The newer jails don't have bars on the cell doors so its hard to see if an inmate is asleep, missing or dead. The city jails have also become de facto mental patient wards and we need housing that facilitates officers observation of inmates under "suicide watch." In the the Brooklyn House this was rarely a problem because of the bars. We also need a new punitive segregation unit that is safe for both the staff and the inmates. Officers in the current "Bing" get feces and urine thrown at them daily. As far as convenience if concerned, I have seem many a mother and grandmother arrive at Rikers Island and breakdown tears because of what their son or daughter has put them through. This usually happens when they have to get searched before their visit. I have also seen attorney's become extremely irrate because they've had to wait for a "count to clear" before they could see their client. So yes convenience is a big issue. You don't have to worry about CO's taking up parking because unlike the NYPD we don't get to park anywhere. The NYPD will ticket our cars if we did. Most of us just got on the train or bus even though we didn't get to ride for free, unlike the NYPD. Most of us lived and had a vested interest in BK, also unlike the NYPD. I am fortunate enough to be eligible for retirement and will not be in the "Belly of the Beast" for much longer. I am also fortunate to have purchased my home in an area of BK where the property values have quintupled (is that a word) and there is no jail in my backyard.
Posted by: CO No Mo" at May 12, 2007 3:23 AM
Putnam-denizen,
Why all the love for inmates and their "loved ones"? How about a little consideration for the law-abiding citizens that live in the area who are forced to shoulder the lifelong burden and daily inconveniences that the detention center brings?
"Gulags up near the Canadian border" staffed with "people who vote Republican"?
Wow, that's some serious hyperbole (not to mention narrow-minded).
They are prisons for criminals CONVICTED of some pretty serious crimes--it's not supposed to be a freakin' country club.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 12, 2007 6:17 AM
6:17am, I am the poster who expressed concern for families of those awaiting trial. If you read putnam-denizen's post, he listed economic and efficiency reasons, and said the concern for families was a separate issue. Many responders, however, provided no logical argument for MOVING a jail from where it existed other than the fact that it was currently in a place where lots of rich people lived.
However, CO No Mo provided very interesting perspective and ways not to EXPAND the jail (leaving the current building as is).
Posted by: Anonymous at May 12, 2007 8:15 AM
Been visitying this site for three weeks.
You learn alot about a group of people
when you give them a voice. Anyway, I
wrote a novella that's coming out in September, I know you will all recognize
your ideas as gold. Have you listened to yourselves, really have you.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 12, 2007 8:18 AM
Sorry Anon 8:18am, how can you have visited this site for 3 weeks, and already have a novella coming out that includes the ideas people express in it?
I am offended by alot of the comments here as well, but you haven't "learned anything" about the people who post here. There are a wide range of views, and you seem to have to decided you know things based on a few weeks of reading anonymous posts.
When I don't like someone's views (and they aren't clearly trolling), I like to post a reasoned response with my views. Other people may comment and correct my views, and if they are polite, I try to respond in kind.
Your post is just so condescending - I guess you are somehow more intelligent, wise, and intuitively brilliant than the rest of us. So I'm sure you don't want to waste your time here anymore.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 12, 2007 8:51 AM
I'm sure many more people read this site in one day than will ever see your cute little novella.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 12, 2007 8:18 PM
6:17 -
I have no patience for rich people who bought houses near a jail and now demand that it be moved away from the courts and next to black people because it "inconveniences" them (and we are still waiting for any reason why it should be moved). Why all the love for inmates and "their loved ones" (sic). because a society is judged by how it treats the most vulnerable. None of these facilities are "prisons" (technically places where people are serving more than a year sentence) and the vast majority of the detainees are not, in fact, convicted of any thing, but are awaiting trial ( see five posts above saying that). Not sure that anyone has advocated for country clubs - just a rational allocation of resources rather than pandering to Muffie and Biff. Is it narrow mined for me to toss in the problems with real prisons - the fact that they are located far away from urban centers and that they (fasten your seat belt) are similar to the 3/5ths provision of the U.S. constitution in that they move men of color to state senate distircts upstate but deny those men the right to vote, thus rewarding Republican districts with jobs, disproportionate clout in the sstate senate, etc. Hardly hyperbole, and a process which strips "law abiding NYC residents" of benefits.
That said, given that the anti-jail folks continue to assert things which simply aren't true, don't read posts, and won't give one reason why their increasingly white neighborhood somehow deserves to be liberated from a pre-existing social institition (the jail), I retire from this conversation (yeah, applause, indifference). BTW I am still waiting for Mr. Brownstoner to appologize for his initially bigoted comments which started this mess... Or was he playing the role of his own troll to get additional hits to sell more advertiising? Pretty gross either way, Mr. Neighbor.
Posted by: putnam-denizen at May 13, 2007 2:02 AM
Putnam-denizen,
The vast majority of the people who live in close proximity to the detention center aren't new to the neighborhood nor rich. Most just remember what an awful neighbor the detention center was when it was in operation and are (rightfully) apprehensive about an even bigger jail.
You may not think that police and CO's parking on curbs and blocking walkways, inmates in their cells yelling at passerbys on the street, children constantly having to deal with seeing men in chains is not a big deal (and these are the minor issues), but they're serious detriments to the quality of life for nearby residents. Are their concerns less valid than those of inmates to you?
You wrote that inmates are the "most vulnerable" segment of society. Forget about children in underfunded schools, the elderly with no health care, illegal aliens who toil in sweatshops here in the states--it's the inmates who are the "most vulnerable". Give me a fucking break.
While I don't completely disagree with your stance on resource allocation, this is hardly the forum to debate how the Census counts prisoners--and yes, it is "narrow mined" (sic) of you to toss in the "real problem" because it's a much more complicated issue than you imagine. Even experts like Dr. Prewitt of Columbia (formerly director of the Census Bureau) concluded that while there are distortions created by counting inmates by where they're incarcerated, changing count procedures would result in greater inaccuracy--what are your credentials?
And prisoners aren't "denied" voting rights--they lost that right because the COMMITTED A CRIME.
Brownstoner doesn't owe you or anyone an apology--I don't think anything he wrote was bigoted in any way, and I have no idea what exactly was so offensive to you--unless you're just the type to see racist overtones in anything and everything.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 13, 2007 8:30 AM
If the relocation of the jail has nothing to do with racism or NIMBYISM then can someone please provide a list of suitable locations for the detention center?
Afterwards, lets see if this new location is anywhere close to upper-middle class whites or those who are poor and with darker skin tones.
I think that this is a fair test. Don't you?
This should be really good!!!
Sandy Balboza, members of the Atlantic Avenue Betterment Association, and those who support the relocation of the jail, I'm waiting.......
Posted by: Anonymous at May 13, 2007 8:52 AM
8:52 is right--I don't think the jail should be relocated to an area where there the majority of the population is "upper-middle class whites".
However, neither do I support moving the jail to an area where the population is predominately "poor and with darker skin tones".
Jails don't belong in residential neighborhoods, period.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 13, 2007 10:04 AM
The jail will reopen. It should reopen as is though. At one point in the 90's DOC had a jail barge in Bay Ridge, a converted motel on Forbell Street in East New York and the Brooklyn Correctional Facility on Flushing. Prior to the opening of the barge, their was community resistance but it opened anyway. This barge was docked in the terminal market area away from private residences. Property values did not drop and crime in the area did not increase. The East New York community did not give much resistance to the opening of "Forbell" which housed sentenced women. This building was literally across the street from private homes. Officers were allowed to park in any legal parking space so this did at times annoy residents when they could not find parking in front of their homes. Crime in the area actually began to decrease. This meant that with the exception of Queens with the 9 jail on Rikers Island and the Queens House which is now closed as well, Queens County had the highest number of jails and Richmond had none. The majority of the inmates then and now come from Brooklyn so if the population continues to increase several jails may come to Brooklyn again. The need for so many jails can be eliminated through a number of social programs and we've heard them all before. Education, Job training, etc.. First and foremost, we have got to get the mentally ill out of the city jails where they can get the services that they need. Substance abusers are another problem. I think that the number of inmates who commit crimes "just so they can support their habit" is lower than reported. What many drug dealers do is cop out to being drug abusers to avoid lengthy sentences and then take up limited space in the few drug rehab programs. I have heard inmates sitting in dorms laughing over how "the judge went for it" in reference to this scam. Many inmates in city jails are awaiting trial, the vast majority have not been released on bail because of the severity of the crime they allegedly committed and their prior criminal records. Many of them are parole violators, probation violators, state prisoners returned to the city for new cases or cases that they've filed in family court or other venues. Most inmates stay in custody for no more than 3 days. Those who are in custody longer will ususally cop out. Very few go to trial. The communities upstate fight for jails to open in their communities for all of the reasons that the previous posters have stated. Gang activity is now becoming more of a problem both in jail and out. So a jail in Brooklyn is the reality.
Posted by: CO No Mo at May 13, 2007 10:25 AM
Brooklyn House of Detention is non-issue...from someone who has lived most of life near enough. Court officers and corrections parking is another issue - and even though jail not currently used - still issue. But that is different issue.
And if Bloomberg were so interested in 'green NYC' he would address all their permits and parking wherever and whenever they feel like it.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 14, 2007 10:17 AM
Parking will the be the least of your problems if this jail reopens.
Posted by: Anonymous at May 14, 2007 8:14 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.