My expeditor tells me it is one of the less reasonable guys, but of course, that may just be his opinion...

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at November 8, 2009 1:51 PM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?

Thanks for the response Jim. Hopefully the recon will work. If it doesn't, we will probably have to give up on the job.

Jp2 - not sure it's the best idea for me to call out the examiner by name. Curious though - why do you want to know?

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at November 8, 2009 8:49 AM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?

Hi Home Reno -

How did this work out? Did you find a good contractor for this job? I have a similar job to do (sistering in joists on two floors around the stairwell) and am looking for a contractor with experience in this area. Any tips/recommendations would be appreciated!

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at October 15, 2009 7:20 AM in response to Carpenter or GC Needed

Ferentz Lafargue, Community Activist and Professor at the New School, will be co-moderating the 36th Council Debate, along with Errol Louis. As of yesterday evening, I do not think Al Vann (the incumbent) had confirmed his attendance, but the majority of the other candidates will be there.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at September 8, 2009 10:16 AM in response to Weekday Events

You can see this year's homicides here:
http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map

Surprised they're putting the tower where they are, since homicides seem to be clustered slightly North of St. John's, closer to the Armory.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at July 8, 2009 2:38 PM in response to Sky Watch Sets Up Shop on Franklin Avenue

Jugsy! We were wondering when you'd show up! So, sounds like you're downgrading your certainty that the community cannot make a difference to "highly doubting", which means you're no longer totally ruling it out. Good to hear you're slowly coming around, BJ.

Also, you still haven't articulated why you think the City's plan is such a good one. Does the following capture your position (feel free to respond with edits):

"I think it's a swell idea to concentrate all homeless services for the entire city of New York into a small number of working class communities of color in central Brooklyn. I furthermore think it would be great to make sure this concentration of services was in an area that is hard for the homeless to get to, and is devoid of hospitals, jobs and social service programs, but has an active drug trade and gang problems."

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 26, 2009 11:01 PM in response to Big Turnout for Rally Against Homeless Intake Center

One of the most galling aspects of this situation is that Bloomberg seems unwilling to even try to articulate an argument for why he is allowing his administration to do this. In public they simply pretend they are not doing it by limply maintaining that they are considering opening a facility in Manhattan as well (though they will give no details, and have defunded Manhattan intake in the budget). It sounds like behind closed doors they offer a wonkish argument that the interests of the homeless and Brooklyn communities must be sacrificed to meet some other vague objective. This kind of obvious dishonesty is a real negative mark for Bloomberg.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 26, 2009 9:55 AM in response to Big Turnout for Rally Against Homeless Intake Center

I believe Big Jugs' position would go something like this:

"I think it's a swell idea to concentrate all homeless services for the entire city of New York into a small number of working class communities of color in central Brooklyn. I furthermore think it would be great to make sure this concentration of services was in an area that is hard for the homeless to get to, and is devoid of hospitals, jobs and social service programs, but has an active drug trade and gang problems."

Am I getting this right Big Jugs? Please feel free to edit.

Anyhow, just got back from the Town Hall. Biggest and most animated crowd I've seen yet - probably about 250 people over the course of the night. Lots of pols (LJ, BDB, MM, KC, etc.) plus residents of the shelter, Coalition for the Homeless, PACC, neighborhood residents, etc. Seems like it's really picking up speed, but not sure if we'll get momentum in time.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 25, 2009 11:24 PM in response to Meeting Tonight to Protest Armory Intake Center

Hey ftgreenepark -

I bet you're right about homeless men currently panhandling in Manhattan. The real question is where they're going to panhandle if the mayor's plan goes through? Here's one of my guesses: in Fort Greene Park.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 25, 2009 3:56 PM in response to Meeting Tonight to Protest Armory Intake Center

Smudge - Curious as to where you think the rest of the 14,000 men who seek emergency shelter each year are going to go if not here. Unless you mean that they simply won't seek formal shelter, and will instead remain on the streets of Manhattan or seek other options, which I agree, some probably will. Do you think this is an outcome that City policy should seek to promote?

Coopfornow - Men will be redirected from the current intake center, which is centrally located in Manhattan in the East 30s, and will be turned into a luxury hotel. The average men seeking emergency shelter per day is 39, but some days will see little traffic and others heavy traffic. Peak days may see about 200 men, though it is hard to predict. The Armory is only being set up to accomodate about 250 men, so presumably other nearby facilities will have to accept overflow. Big question is how many of the chronically homeless will simply choose to move to the streets of Brooklyn to be closer to the shelter.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 25, 2009 3:50 PM in response to Meeting Tonight to Protest Armory Intake Center

Big Jugs is a guy?

I'm so disappointed...

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 8:58 PM in response to CB8 Votes Against Re-Opening Homeless Shelter

Also, for the record, I'm not really concerned about my property value, since I don't plan to move for a while. I also don't really consider the homeless men hanging around B-A to really present that much danger (but many of my neighbors do). My main problem with it is that concentrating so many people with so many problems in such a small area totally changes the feel of the neighborhood. More trash on the street, more men pissing between cars, harassing women, publicly drinking and generally posing a nuisance in a dozen ways. This is a residential neighborhood full of families. We should do our part and shoulder a reasonable amount of these services in this neighborhood, but we shouldn't absorb it for the whole city.

I'd have a harder time opposing this plan if it wasn't so obviously (except to Big Jugs!) such a bad policy for the homeless. Does it make sense to concentrate homeless men in an area far away from any jobs, where drugs can still be purchased on the corner and gangs are visibly active? Is this the kind of environment that is going to help them get their lives on track. Hey BJ - why do you think the Partnership for the Homeless and Picture the homeless are against the plan and suing the City? Because they want to prop up my property values?

Just curious Big Jugs - where do you work? Feel free to be vague, but I'm really curious about where you are coming from. Thanks.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 8:13 PM in response to CB8 Votes Against Re-Opening Homeless Shelter

What's up Big Jugs!

You never answered me on the Armory thread the other day, and that made me feel bad! So, like I asked, do you think this is a good plan for the homeless or for Crown Heights North (my neighborhood)? Or do you just not care? I'm really curious. If you have an argument for this policy, I'd like to hear it. Most of us in this community are not arguing that all homeless services be removed from our neighborhood - just that we have a more reasonable amount. I think a lot of us would be fine with doing more than our fair share. But we already have 6X the boro average BEFORE the intake center. What part of this don't you get? Send me a separate email and I'll explain it more to you if you are still having trouble (I don't want to make everybody suffer through the somewhat simple explanation again).

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 8:01 PM in response to CB8 Votes Against Re-Opening Homeless Shelter

I think the points about the impact to Bed-stuy are dead on. I'd also encourage people to go to Google maps and locate the corner of Franklin and Pacific - the closest corner to Peter Young Facility and the Southwest corner of the Armory, and a popular hangout for their residents. Checkout where it sits in Brooklyn. The Armory is four blocks away from Vanderbilt Avenue in Prospect Heights. It is only a little bit further to the heart of Clinton Hill. This gets discussed as a Crown Heights problem, but the folks on Utica and Troy are much further away from this facility than the people on Washington and Carlton.

There seem to be a number of competing theories about how homeless men will respond to the relocation of the intake center. Many, including the Manhattan Borough President and many of the homeless advocacy organizations, claim that homeless men will simply remain on the streets of Manhattan, and will thus be forced to forego shelter and services. Others, including many in Crown Heights and increasingly other nearby neighborhoods, are concerned that homeless men will permanently relocate to brooklyn, and because their services are located in Manhattan, will be increasingly untreated and in greater states of crisis. Then there are those who suspect that the whole plan is part of a mayoral initiative to simply drive homeless people out of New York City by making resources so slim and hard to access. I suspect we will see some mix of the above, though I don't expect many homeless to leave (where else can they go?) and expect that any that do will be replaced by the newly homeless, courtesy of the economy. I sincerely hope that the unspoken policy of our mayor is not to drive the homeless from our City. New York should be better than that.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 2:09 PM in response to CB8 Votes Against Re-Opening Homeless Shelter

Hi Big Jugs!

I think you are partially right - the City's plan will relocate a significant part of NYC's chronically homeless population to Crown Heights, Prospect Heights, Clinton Hill and Bed-Stuy (for those wondering about the selection of neighborhoods, check out where Bedford-Atlantic sits on a map). This is why the community is freaking out. However, an equally significant portion of the population will remain on the streets of Manhattan, where the facilities they utilize, their existing networks and opportunities for work and panhandling will remain. This is why the homeless advocates are freaking out. The combination of these two effects is why people are maintaining that this plan is very bad.

Curious though - you sound like you think this plan is a reasonable idea. Do you feel that this is a fair and reasonable treatment of the community around the Armory? Or do you just not care? Just curious on how you came to your opinion on this... thanks.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 5, 2009 8:34 AM in response to City Reneging on Homeless Intake Center Promise?

Thanks to both of you for your comments. Very Helpful!

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at May 6, 2009 4:21 PM in response to Change tax class from 4 fam to 3

Agreed g man, but this is why I think we need to hold them to their commitments. We shouldn't just be shrugging our shoulders. We should be demanding that they reaffirm the (albeit non-binding) commitment to find another space in Manhattan, and insist that they identify a space, complete the ULURP application and add the budget line.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at September 22, 2008 1:17 PM in response to Monday Links

I was happy to see everyone, from community groups to elected officials to homeless advocacy organizations to the homeless themselves make the very strong case against moving intake services for homeless men from Manhattan to Crown Heights. There is near unanimous outcry against this plan (the only supporters being DHS and the directors of a few non-profits like the Doe Fund which live off the DHS teat).

I was, however, very discouraged to hear the City back off from their commitment to keep an intake center in Manhattan. At the hearing, this commitment had been downgraded to "considering the possibility" of maintaining an intake center in Manhattan. This is a reversal of their previous commitment, as reported in the NYTimes last month:

"On Thursday, Heather J. Janik, a spokeswoman for the city’s homeless services agency, said an additional intake center would be opened in Manhattan to lessen demand at the proposed Brooklyn site. She said it would open “in tandem” with the new Brooklyn intake center, at the same time that the current central intake center, the Bellevue Men’s Shelter on the East Side, closed down. The site of the new center in Manhattan, which will be open 24 hours, has not been determined."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/15/nyregion/15armory.html?scp=2&sq=bedford%20intake&st=cse

The City should not be allowed to back off form their commitment.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at September 22, 2008 12:08 PM in response to Monday Links

Another wild card for this area is the fate of the Bedford-Atlantic Armory, which borders on Franklin. The City's current plan to redirect all homeless men from all 5 boros to the B-A Armory does not bode well for the northern part of Franklin Avenue, nor for Crown Heights in general (and adjacent parts of Prospect Heights, Clinton Hill and Bed Stuy). The area Amzi Hill references above could be particularly affected. Whether you are rooting for fast, slow, or no gentrification, the city's current plan will move the neighborhood in a bad direction.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at September 12, 2008 12:19 PM in response to Williamsburg Comes to Crown Heights?

Wow - discouraged to hear that some of the Hasidic community are working against those lanes. Rabbi Glanz - I'd encourage you to rethink your position. There is not a good alternative route to get to and from the Williamsburg Bridge from Bed-stuy and points south other than the streets you mentioned. More and more of us will be using this route, lanes or no lanes. By allowing bike lanes you exert some control over this traffic by creating order. Otherwise you end up with us bikers chaotically taking over the whole road. Remember - if there's no bike lane, it's ALL bike lane.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at September 8, 2008 2:35 PM in response to Time to Vote, People

As to the City's "concessions" on the move of the homeless intake center to the Bedford-Atlantic Armory:

First, any move by the City to redirect the flow of the homeless to the Crown Heights community is unacceptable. We already have way more than our fair share of homeless services. And even if the City splits intake between 2 centers, Crown Heights, and the neighborhoods between CH and Manhattan (FG, CH, PH, PS, downtown), will experience thousands and thousands of additional transient homeless men passing through each year.

Second, you will have to excuse us if we view the City's ambiguous promise with a degree of skepticism. they have not acted in good faith so far - trying to sneak this change past the community at first, then gaming the numbers and feigning ignorance when confronted. Now they claim they will create a new intake center of undetermined size at an undetermined location when they "close the Manhattan site". We've been told they expect to start shipping men to the B-A Armory this fall (beds have already been moved in). But their "new Manhattan Center" won't be online until June 2009 (if it indeed ever happens). They cannot be trusted.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at August 15, 2008 9:44 AM in response to Friday Links

In response to Brenda From Flatbush's and daveinbedstuy's excellent suggestions about the media, I believe CHaRM is putting together a media kit. The community has also gotten traction in bringing out the media. Last night's event had reporters from the NYTimes, The NY Sun, the Daily News, AM New York, The Amsterdam News and City Limits in attendance, all scribbling and clicking.

And, of course, someone from Brownstoner.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at August 13, 2008 12:46 PM in response to Homeless Intake Center Plan Provokes Broad Opposition

Hi all - longtime lurker, first time poster.

Last night's turnout at the meeting was testament to a lot of hard work by a LOT of people in the community. The days of 20 person rallies on this issue are over. Expect hundreds at the next.

A couple of observations on the DHS presentation last night:

The City is currently saying they will cut the number of “beds” at the shelter from 350 to 230. Yet they maintain that an assessment shelter as well as an intake facility will now occupy that space. Already in 2008 we have seen nights of 250+ people seeking shelter through the existing facility in Manhattan. It is hard to do math on this that does not come out with the City housing 300, 400, 500 people at this location.

An offer from the City to create a rec center at the Armory would be greatly appreciated. Their offer last night, however, to provide half of the money up to $7 million (I’m told that the renovation of the Washington Heights Armory cost $30 million) is not helpful. As we enter a period of time when funding for these kinds of changes is likely to dry up, their offer to cover “half” struck me as pretty cynical.

DHS maintains that they will have an intake facility in Manhattan in addition to the Armory. The dep commissioner admitted, however, that the existing facility in Manhattan is slated to be closed in June of 2009, and that they have not identified another facility to replace it. He essentially said “trust us”.

One wants to trust their elected officials and their appointees. But their performance on this issue has been really intellectually dishonest. They obviously game the numbers when they talk to us, they make us offers they know are worthless, they play dumb when confronted with incontrovertible facts. They clearly just don’t care – which is discouraging. But at least we know where we stand with them.

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at August 13, 2008 11:39 AM in response to Homeless Intake Center Plan Provokes Broad Opposition

because if its one of the reasonable guys then your an unlikely to get a reconsideration.

-jp

Posted by: jp2 at November 8, 2009 9:04 AM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?

My expeditor tells me it is one of the less reasonable guys, but of course, that may just be his opinion...

Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at November 8, 2009 1:51 PM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?

What I have found in terms of getting recons is that the first examiner will rarely, if ever, let something go if it could in any way be considered against the code. It's their job to interpret and enforce the code. They do not have the leeway to decide if a case warrants an exception. That's strictly reserved for the chief plan examiner. I've even been told by at least one examiner that the case I was arguing was valid, but that he could not make the exception, and that if I went for the recon, it would be granted by the chief examiner.

So if the examiner denies it, take it above his head to the chief.

Jim Hill

Posted by: JimHill at November 9, 2009 9:05 AM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?

The owner and the Architect (not the just the expeditor acting alone) should make an appointment with the plan examiner and then work your way up the chain of command. However, it seems that what the DOB is asking is fair. Ed kopel Archtects, pC

Posted by: edkopel at November 9, 2009 11:01 AM in response to Stairs to Roof - Change C of O?