« Refi Wave on the Way? Parking Ticket Hot Spots »

December 3, 2008

What's Up at the Sumner Avenue Armory?

That's what Bed-Stuy residents have been asking ever since a strange flier began making its way through the neighborhood: “Mayor Bloomberg has announced intent to close the Bellevue men’s shelter in Manhattan…the overflow of men (850) will be moved to the Sumner Avenue Armory along with the (350) men from the Atlantic Avenue Shelter…a large number of these men are dangerous felons…some are sexual predators, and some have mental conditions…homeless men are being bused into the Sumner Avenue Armory each night…” Well, City Limits demystifies the rumors about the Armory, and the neighborhood's adverse reaction to changes within it. Henry L. Butler, chairman of the neighborhood's Community Board 3, contacted the Department of Homeless Services, who said no such thing was happening. That didn't make residents feel better, especially since they'd seen homeless folk bused in to the building late at night. The problem, say residents, is that the shelter is supposed to be for working men, down on their luck, not, you know, criminals. And that was fine with them. In November, Bed-Stuyers met with DHS Commissioner Robert V. Hess, who explained that a few stragglers, who can't fit in full shelters, get bused over to spend the night. “So, what happens the next day?” they asked Hess, who replied: “They’re released the next morning and given Metro cards.” That upset some who feared undesirable folks were left to wander the area; for others, the explanation was satisfying. What they'd really like is to see the Armory have a different kind of new life, more like the old. “There was originally a bowling alley in there, a swimming pool, rifle range, horse stable, three catering halls, a gymnasium and a drill field the size of three football fields, all sitting there, not being used," said one resident. "I have the blueprints.”
What's Up at the Armory? [City Limits]

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/7433

Comments

Kudos to City Limits and author Rosie McCobb for such an extremely well written and comprehensive article.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at December 3, 2008 9:39 AM

quote:
feared undesirable folks were left to wander the area

seriously, move to a gated community if that is outlook on life.

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 9:41 AM

"and some have mental conditions" This goes hand in hand with gkw's quote yesterday...

"This blog has basically become a repository for people slowly being driven insane by their obsession with NYC real estate."

I'm glad I'm not the only one.

On a separate issue, i'd nix the rifle range if they bring back some of the old amenities. Although if it were there it'd be fun!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at December 3, 2008 9:48 AM

Rob, you are missing the point. Communities such as Bed Stuy and Crown Heights, which has an even larger shelter issue looming, have finally gotten our heads above water in terms of positive economic and social outlook. Our communities are shedding the long time (mostly erroneous) image of being an urban hell, and are being recognised and praised for our housing stock, architecture, good public transportation, and welcoming neighbors.

I'm sure that statement sets some here shrieking in laughter, but the fact remains that we have worked very, very hard to keep and improve our communities, and like posher places, we care about our safety, and the safety of our children and neighbors. You may notice, no one said there shouldn't be a shelter, we all understand the need to help those down on their luck, but kicking anyone out to the curb, with only a Metrocard and a handshake, is hardly meeting their needs, or assuring the community that it is safe. It has nothing to do with being snotty about those who roam our streets. We have more than enough locally grown problems, we don't need imports dumped by the city.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 3, 2008 9:53 AM

once again MM puts me in place. it's true it does seem weird to have a community such as BS become a dumping ground.. on the other hand ammenities are cheaper there than in other neighborhoods. Are the people in the shelters on assistance? it sounds like it's a mens only shelter and unless they are disabled they usually will not get any kind of monetary benefits for the most part. so where will that person's dollar stretch further? bed stuy or the west village? im just throwing that out there. im sure ill be in one of these places very soon anyway and then ill come back and log on from the library and tell you first hand what it's really like.

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 10:16 AM

rob, your comment "so where will that person's dollar stretch further? bed stuy or the west village? im just throwing that out there." Is interesting. Despite the perception of Bed Stuy being where on'e dollar might stretch further I can tell you that is not the case. Bed Stuy's service sector is deplorable. Corner bodegas are generally a ripoff for the community and don't even get me started oin the prices at the dry cleaners. No, the homeless/jobless are not using the dry cleaners but they truly get ripped off at the bodegas, their primary outlet for the purchase of what additionally should be considered unhealthy food & snacks.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at December 3, 2008 10:26 AM

DIBS, I know we've discussed this before but what do they charge around you to launder a shirt and dry clean a pair of pants?

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 10:30 AM

Rob, I don't mean to pick on you, and I like your questioning of everything. But your middle class assumptions are showing here. Most people in the shelters are totally off the grid - no public assistance, no money, no nothing. You can't get public assistance if you don't have an address. That's one of the reasons why it is so hard for those who want to work, but are homeless, to get back into the system. They are not able to put down roots where they could receive mail, open a bank account, all those day to day things that we don't even think about, but are vital to establishing an identity and enable one to receive public benefits.

While the local bodega's coffee may be cheaper than Starbucks, living in BS is not cheaper. As a matter of fact, things tend to cost more in lower income neighborhoods, it has long been known that foodstuffs in inner city supermarkets are of lesser quality, older, and cost more than in more expensive neighborhoods.

Long story short, being homeless anywhere is not something one would wish on anyone, no matter where they are.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 3, 2008 10:34 AM

My shirts are $2.95...can't remember the pants. Yes, we did discuss this before. I was paying $1.75 when I left the UES in Manhattan.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at December 3, 2008 10:36 AM

i havent seen this to be the case about the bodegas thing. i know for a fact that the supermarkets i went to in harlem (minus fairway of course) and even supermarkets when i lived on the lower east side, were significantly cheaper than the supermarkets that ive gone to in park slope. granted maybe prices skyrocketed in the couple of months ive lived here? but no you are right about certain staples in bodegas being mad expensive. try buying laundry detergent in one. i lol'd my ass off when i stopped at the bodega outside the R train on the 4th avenue for laundry detegergent because i didnt want to go into a supermarket or the fauxdegas on 5th avenue... it was like almost 10 bux for a bottle of some kind of detergent whose name i ever heard before. and it was covered in dust.

*Rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 10:53 AM

Dave. I think you need to find a new cleaners...immediately! Try Sun Cleaners on Fulton between Kingston and Tompkins. Great quality...much lower than what you pay now.

Posted by: cmontgom at December 3, 2008 10:54 AM

cmontgom...i won't travel for a cleaners. This one is across the street. Maybe if time gey tougher but then I won't be needing the dress shirts anyway!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at December 3, 2008 11:00 AM

"My shirts are $2.95". That's steep. It's $1.50 at the relatively new organic cleaners on Montague, between Heights Cafe and Teresa's.

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 11:20 AM

"organic cleaners?" now ive heard everything :-/

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 11:27 AM

cleaners in the area are a big rip off especially the one at Veronia PL and Fulton. That said why did the city turn Park Slope Amory into Disneyland and want to make ours a shelter. This is the second largest Amory in the county it should be something great in our community.

Posted by: Amzi Hill at December 3, 2008 12:01 PM

Dry cleaning uses a toxic chemical (perc) with long-term environmental effects. Organic (or natural) dry cleaning may mean nothing since the term is unregulated, and they may actually still use perc. One should avoid dry cleaning if possible.

http://www.nysun.com/style/the-real-story-on-organic-dry-cleaning/85914/

Posted by: cmu at December 3, 2008 12:11 PM

sad when a post about homelessness turns into discussions about dry cleaning :-/ george jefferson would be proud. (he was a dry cleaner owner right? and i know he hated homeless people)

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 12:19 PM

DIBS, Biff..you two should be ashamed of yourselves for steering a thread about a homeless shelter into your elitist dilemmas of laundering your white collared buttoned up stuffy shirts.

Irony, indeed. Shame on both of you!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 12:23 PM

cmu, that's interesting and I'm always eager to hear about ways to reduce one's carbon footprint (as is evident in yesterday's Closing Bell thread!). Truth is, I very rarely have dry cleaning done. I just have my shirts laundered, which I assumed was no different from an environmental perspective, than washing them at home (I'm just lazy and hate to iron, so I send them out).

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 12:25 PM

Biff, 12:25...at it again.

I've read your posts in the closing thread since yesterday, you are speaking like a true elitist!!
I don't have time to compose a lengthy response to you over there.

"I'm just lazy and hate to iron, so I send them out"
Does the dry cleaning service come pick them up, or do you walk them over?

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 12:47 PM

"you are speaking like a true elitist!!"
I would suspect, based on the fact NYC seems to have around 1-2 dry cleaners on every block (must be almost 10 within a 5 min. walk from my front door), that there are approximately 4,000,000 other elitists just like me in this city. So having one's clothes laundered is about as elitist as having a shower, which, incidentally, you might want to try sometime.

"I don't have time to compose a lengthy response to you over there."
Translation: I can't defeat your argument.

"Does the dry cleaning service come pick them up, or do you walk them over?"
They'll pick it up and drop it off, but I prefer to walk it over. I also return the white hangers to them so they can use them again.

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 12:59 PM

"you are speaking like a true elitist!!"
Biff, I was referring to the closing thread from yesterday. LEARN TO READ A SENTENCE AND ANSWER IT! Not everything is about you and your efing dirty dress shirts.

"Translation: I can't defeat your argument."
Truly, you are mistaken. Shill has taken up where I left off. I don't want to address you and your gas gouging theories.
Your views are of an elitist. Mine are of a socialist.

You're redeemed yourself by returning the white hangers. But if hang your shirts on your own hangers when you get them home, you should take those in so you can get them back already on them.
Cleaners rarely re-use those metal hangers when they're returned.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 1:12 PM

"Shill has taken up where I left off."
S/he sure has; shill's getting pounded in there now like you were pounded in there yesterday!

"But if hang your shirts on your own hangers when you get them home, you should take those in so you can get them back already on them."
Yes, my cleaner wants nothing more than to mark my own hangers while he's doing my shirts and then dig them up and manually hang my shirts back on them. Plus, he's assured me he does re-use the wire hangers I return. I take him at his word.

"Your views are of an elitist. Mine are of a socialist."
I'm elitist because I suggested we reduce our carbon footprint and look for cleaner, cheaper, more environmentally friendly sources of energy. You're a socialist and you talk about taking your big assed Caddy for joyride's around the block because gas is cheap. The What has officially been replaced as the most delusional poster on this blog.

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 1:23 PM

now i images of the NO MORE WIRE HANGERS! scene in my head. and i'd gladly go on a joyride in that caddy of yours brg! besides, i will never have kids, and that's the biggest way for someone to have the smallest carbon footprint possible (think about it ;) ).

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at December 3, 2008 1:46 PM

"S/he sure has; shill's getting pounded in there now like you were pounded in there yesterday!"

I'm very open minded, but I'm offed by this comment. You couldn't have waited a few, until at least I was done with.
I think s/he is holding up. You on the other hand have limited sight. You can't see a view but your own.

"Yes, my cleaner wants nothing more than to mark my own hangers while he's doing my shirts and then dig them up and manually hang my shirts back on them."
- If you are a socially conscious person, as you claim, then you need to find a cleaner that does do that. Mine does. Hubby shirts come back on his own hangers. Or why not spend some time with the cleaner and rant about their contributions to wastefulness.

"Plus, he's assured me he does re-use the wire hangers I return. I take him at his word."
- You are so easily guided! You take people for their word.

"I'm elitist because I suggested we reduce our carbon footprint and look for cleaner, cheaper, more environmentally friendly sources of energy."
- You're an elitist because you want to do it at the expense of hard work people that barely eke out an existence.

"You're a socialist and you talk about taking your big assed Caddy for joyride's around the block because gas is cheap."
- Clearly, my sense of humor is lost on you. Surely, YOU should have recognized that as a joke.

Plus, I think *rob* just POOWED you, my friend.

"The What has officially been replaced as the most delusional poster on this blog."
- delusion, illusion...it is all created.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 2:21 PM

i can't tell anymore if you two are serious or just playing around.

Posted by: z at December 3, 2008 3:27 PM

z, BRG is serious...seriously delusional that is. Did you know we have no energy crisis and we are all entitled to pay 10 cents per gallon of gasoline? If we run out of natural resources, which will never happen anyway, it's not our fault. We did everything we could. Sure we could have driven more efficient cars, but why bother when we can drill Alaska dry and shift the problem to the next generation. We want our cheap gas!!

But shhhhhhhh, you better not complain about the poor, hard working people who can barely eke out an existence (even though they can afford to drive gas guzzling monstrosities -poor babies, having paid bargain basement prices for gas for 50 years) lest you be viewed as a condescending elitist.

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 3:43 PM

Z - unfortunately, we're serious. It's been going on since yesterday's Closing Bell Thread regarding gas pricing...and we're still arguing over it.

"Did you know we have no energy crisis and we are all entitled to pay 10 cents per gallon of gasoline?"
- Biff, that's condesending...to Z. But you don't see that cause you're above everybody.

"If we run out of natural resources, which will never happen anyway, it's not our fault. We did everything we could. Sure we could have driven more efficient cars, but why bother when we can drill Alaska dry and shift the problem to the next generation. We want our cheap gas!!"
- Biff, you are truly out of touch, right now. Come down a little bit, from your high horse. Who said any of this? NOT I!!! Don't put words in my mouth. This is not my point of contention!!!!!!!
No matter how many times I try to explain my view, you just don't understand it.

Biff, I whole heartedly believe we need to find alternative resources. I do think as a society we are wasteful and need to address these issues and address them immediately. I don’t argue with that.

My point is: I don’t think the price of gas should be the catalyst for achieving oil independence. And I hope it isn’t. That’s not to say it won’t be. Maybe in my idealistic mind I hope that we find a solution long before a war is waged for the last barrel of oil (or has it already been started, but I digress).

"But shhhhhhhh, you better not complain about the poor, hard working people who can barely eke out an existence (even though they can afford to drive gas guzzling monstrosities -poor babies, having paid bargain basement prices for gas for 50 years) lest you be viewed as a condescending elitist."
- Biff, you truly are a condescending elitist with this remark. Have you been out of your enclave of that isolated nabe of yours. Have you been to poor neighborhoods across America. Do you know people that barely eke out a living. I can assure you they ARE NOT the ones driving gas guzzling monstrosities.

And where were you for the past 50 years fighting this cause? Or 10 years ago for that matter.

Come down to the working class sometime and see how we live.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 4:13 PM

"And where were you for the past 50 years fighting this cause?"

Even a condescending elitist like me can't fight a cause before being born. I'm hardly out of touch with the working class and I would venture to say I'm at least as informed and involved, (and likely more), about issues involving human rights, the environment, people with special needs, and other related topics. My point is that, while nobody is to blame more than the oil companies, the car companies and those in cahoots with them for our current situation, high gas prices (UNFORTUNATELY) appear to be the only way action will be taken to find a viable solution. It is extremely horrible that those who can barely get by now will have to endure it and I wish and hope things could change without this having to happen. But it hasn't so far. The issue isn't on the minds of the majority until gas prices go up. Then people start thinking of alternatives. As bad as high gas prices now are (which, again, are very cheap compared to every other country), the issue pales in comparison to what we'll be facing if something drastic isn't done soon.

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 4:43 PM

Forgive me for not addressing the all-important issue of dry-cleaning, but regarding the armory, I was at the meeting in November when Commissioner Hess addressed this issue and there remain some gaps in the city's information regarding the closing of the Bellevue shelter and their use of the Sumner Armory. When asked what would happen to the 900 men who use Bellevue when that shelter closes in June, Commissioner Hess replied that they would all be back in their homes. All 900 of them??! It seems likely that when the city discovers in June that only a few of them have been placed back in their homes, they will suddenly have an emergency on their hands -- who could have foreseen it? -- and lo and behold, those hundreds of men will end up in Sumner.

Also, when it's really important to get these men to their shelter location for the night, they are bused to Bed-Stuy. But the next morning, they're simply handed Metrocards when it's time to go back to the agency across the street from the Bellevue shelter to receive the social services they desperately need. If the city were really doing its best to help these homeless people, wouldn't it bus them back to Manhattan to get help?

I'm proud to live in the only American city to grant a right to shelter to its residents, but the burden needs to be borne by the entire city, not just by a neighborhood like Bed-Stuy. When we're tearing down shelters near social services to build a luxury hotel (like there aren't enough of those already) and then dumping the displaced homeless people in an underserved neighborhood of Brooklyn, there is something very wrong.

Posted by: Kate at December 3, 2008 4:43 PM

"high gas prices (UNFORTUNATELY) appear to be the only way action will be taken to find a viable solution."
- because we've made it so. If we educate the masses about the issues, there could be other solutions. Try to think broad here, Biff.

"It is extremely horrible that those who can barely get by now will have to endure it"
- Have to endure it!!!! Have to endure it!!!! Yep, spoken like an informed and involved caring member of the working class.

How about we devise a system; a pay what you can. everytime someone goes fill toup at the pump, we evaluate their assests; the rich who are doing well and not struggling pays more, someone struggling and needs to fill their tank to get to their minimum wage job to put food on the table for their family of 4 pays less.

I'm going to say it for the last time:
What needs to change is how society views cars, transportation, and resources.

I'm really tired over this topic. Let's end this.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 5:00 PM

"Also, when it's really important to get these men to their shelter location for the night, they are bused to Bed-Stuy. But the next morning, they're simply handed Metrocards when it's time to go back to the agency across the street from the Bellevue shelter to receive the social services they desperately need. If the city were really doing its best to help these homeless people, wouldn't it bus them back to Manhattan to get help?" - Kate

If it was really important, they would leave the shelter, and the social service center in Manhattan, where most of the homeless are, certainly ALL of the homeless who end up at Sumner Ave, or at the Armory on Bedford.

They can afford to hand Metrocards out right and left, but can't afford to keep the fares where working people can afford them? I'm certainly not begrudging the homeless Metrocards, but what kind of screwed up planning is it, especially when $$$ is gone, for them to waste dollars bussing and transporting, when keeping it all in Manhattan, where the vast majority of the homeless are, makes more fiscal, environmental and humanitarian sense?

Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 3, 2008 5:08 PM

"Have to endure it!!!! Have to endure it!!!! Yep, spoken like an informed and involved caring member of the working class."

I think you really misinterpreted this or I did a very poor job of making the point. I'm not for a second saying it's fair or it's right. If things really were fair and just, the working class would have had economical cars running on electricity or another energy source available decades ago. I wish as much as anyone there could somehow be a revolution in our energy dependence without anyone having to suffer or pay high gas prices. But I just don't know if that is possible given we aren't even close to it and now we're in dire times energy wise. By having to endure it, I mean they are paying for the sins of the car companies, the gas companies, the government (through their inaction), the suburban builders (and those who flocked to suburbia). They are the ones who are being made to suffer. But I also don't see the average consumer as totally without blame either. They've helped support the system for a long time. Please just try to see the movies I suggested.

Anyway, I'm done too....

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 5:10 PM

Good...are you taking a cab home today :)

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 5:15 PM

Montrose, this topic veered off topic when clearly the issue of the armory is a very important one.

I'm sorry that Biff and I got into the oil / gas issue here.
I'd actually love to hear your (Montrose's) views on the gas topic. We also battled it out in yesterday's closing thread if you want to chime in. You could be the voice of reason.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at December 3, 2008 5:21 PM

I have a feeling MM won't touch our debate with a 10 foot pole or a heavyset girl with a plaid shirt and cigs rolled up in her sleeve named Zytka. (Sorry, crossthread joke based on DIBS' comment in the Condo of the Day).

Posted by: Biff Champion at December 3, 2008 6:08 PM

Woah, Biff, I'm leaving THAT one alone, too.

I'm actually a fun, generally non-serious person. Lately though, I've realized I waste a lot of time on this site, and since I no longer get paid for sitting in my office, whether I have work or not, I can't do it anymore. I'm trying to limit my B'stoner time to once in the late morning, around lunch break, and then in the evening. If there are juicy topics, I'm in trouble. If I don't, I'll be here asking for donations to pay my mortgage. You know what Poley and the What would do with that one.

Since I don't have a car, I confess to not having a firm position on this. I do think no one (auto industry or consumer) does anything unless their backs are to the wall, but high gas prices adversely affect those who can least afford it. Ask those who have to live in the outermost part of the boroughs, poorly served by public transportation. They can't afford to live closer, near public trans, so they have to drive more than someone who may have more money, but doesn't need to drive. Like all of our quality of life issues, it's complicated.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 3, 2008 6:56 PM

Montrose Morris is incorrect in stating that homeless people cannot receive public benefits. Plenty of shelter residents receive SSI, SSDI, TANF, and Medicaid. Those in tier II shelters can use the shelter address and many, many others use the addresses of friends or relatives. That does not mean that the lives of homeless individuals are peaches and cream, far from it, but to say that they cannot receive benefits is erroneous.

Posted by: Big Jugs at December 3, 2008 7:00 PM

Montrose I have to wing myself off this site also.. I spend to much work time on here. I hope he keeps talking about Brooklyn Heights, Park Slope and other establish neighborhoods. To me it like talking about Manhattan UES... I know those places are great already. Nothing really adventurist about those places anymore... I am not really interested in those areas and it keeps me off this site. When Bedford Stuyvesant and Crown Heights even Clinton Hill are topics I am like a magnet.

Posted by: Amzi Hill at December 3, 2008 7:44 PM

Big Jugs, I stand corrected. I was given erroneous info. I must nitpick to say that there are still those who do not have relatives or friends, or live in Tier 2 shelters who cannot receive mail, etc. Those are the ones most likely to completely fall between the cracks, and the ones who need the most help.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 3, 2008 11:32 PM

A Metro card and a handshake? I know discussion about drycleaners is up there in priority, but did anyone connect the fatal stabbing of a bus driver....
just throwing that out there;/

Posted by: pig three at December 4, 2008 7:26 AM

« Refi Wave on the Way? Parking Ticket Hot Spots »

December 3, 2008

What's Up at the Sumner Avenue Armory?

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions