Crown Heights Doesn't Want UES Homeless Center
Some Crown Heights residents are organizing against the city’s plan to relocate its sole intake center for single homeless men from the Upper East Side to the castle-like armory at Atlantic and Bedford Avenues. The city plans to turn its UES facility into a hotel and conference center, despite 60 percent of the city’s homeless…
Some Crown Heights residents are organizing against the city’s plan to relocate its sole intake center for single homeless men from the Upper East Side to the castle-like armory at Atlantic and Bedford Avenues. The city plans to turn its UES facility into a hotel and conference center, despite 60 percent of the city’s homeless population living in Manhattan versus 16 percent in Brooklyn. We have a source who works closely with the Mayor’s Office on this issue, who said the goal is to make the intake center more difficult to reach so fewer homeless men would turn to the shelter system. Each shelter bed cost $35,000 a year, or $2,916 a month. The city would rather spend that money on more permanent housing programs and hopes some men who typically sleep at shelters for a night or two would instead stay with friends or family, said the source, adding that the city’s most at-risk homeless population tends to avoid shelters.
Rachel Pratt of CHARM (Crown Heights Revitalization Movement), backed by Councilwoman Letitia James, said her community board already has more than its fair share of social service beds—112 beds per 100 acres, compared to neighborhoods like Bensonhurst/ Gravesend and Bay Ridge/ Dyker Heights, which have less than 6 beds per 100 acres. The armory accounts for half of the 1,170 beds in Crown Heights North/ Prospect Height’s, and has one of the worst reputations among in the city. James said she wants a portion of the armory converted into a recreation center like in Park Slope, and doesn’t feel her district should have to accept the increase in homelessness in exchange. See the full comparison data on social service beds in Brooklyn community boards after the jump…
City to Close UES Homeless Shelter, Relocate to Bed-Stuy [Daily News]
Upper East Siders Want Homeless Shelter to Stay [NY Post]
The Future of the Atlantic Armory? [Brownstoner]
History of the Atlantic Armory [Bed-Stuy Banana]
An Alternative to Capitalism (which will end homelessness)
The following link takes you to an essay titled: “Home of the Brave?” which I wrote and appeared in the Athenaeum Library of Philosophy:
http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/steinsvold.htm
John Steinsvold
Hello Montrose,
I just read all of the comments and yours was a bit offensive. Public places are public places for a reason, so that people can utilize them. ALL people.
I have a nephew who is staying in the shelter and he suffers from schizophrenia and is NOT dangerous. We are happy that he has found a place who may be able to provide him with some safety, routine and shelter.
We have had deaths in our family and our family has been permeated by mental illness. Are we bad? No. Are we not intelligent? No. Are we not educated? No. The fact is that the family unit is breaking down and has broken down due to divorces, child support that many men can not pay and live on their own, layoffs, competition for work, poor education and expensive education, expensive housing. I think the $2,000 and some money that is spent on each person includes staff, food, security, beds, utilities for the shelter and counseling.
You sure sound like a unevolved person with the remarks you state. Homeless men would rather be in an armory with less beds and they develop their own community and have conistent people they see, staff, security guards and it is not easy for them. They can not roam around all night otherwise they have no where to sleep. Some work during the day and try to get back to get a bed. Some have been afflicted with life crisis, some with mental illness, some with lack of education and skills and some with paying child support and alimony for families that have dissolved.
Not everyone is single and able to use their paycheck for their own personal luxuries. Not everyone has their sanity all the time.
I think you should take a good look at yourself, your response seems very judgmental and unevolved.
As one of the founders of the Crown Heights Revitalization Movement (CHaRM), I am very much opposed to the City’s plan to move the intake center to the Bedord-Atlantic Armory. It is bad for homeless men; it is bad for our neighorhood which already has more residential social service beds per acre than any other Brooklyn neighborhood. Not to mention how poorly served the men are already at the Bedford-Atlantc Armory!
If you are interested in joining with CHaRM to organize and give voice to our neighborhoods, please contact me at crownheightsrm@gmail.com or rpratt6@optonline.net.
We must ignore all the negative comments from the bashers and concentrate on uniting to make sure that this plan doesn’t come to fruition. Crown Heights is a wonderful area with lots of hard-working people who care about their homes and are proud to live here. I agree that the less fortunate are entitled to have a place where they can go to for the assistance that they need, but it’s unrealistic for the city to think that one borough should carry the burden all alone. As someone else mentioned, the Bedford-Atlantic armory doesn’t function in the manner it should now — just yesterday, as my family drove by, my 4 year-old son asked me why that man was sleeping on the floor. He was actually sleeping on the steps of the armory on the Atlantic Avenue side. Just imagine adding more homeless men to the load. It’s just a disaster waiting to happen.
Montrose:
I wrote down CHARMs’ information so I can get (more) involved. This is ridiculous! Since all the boroughs pay equal income, sales and property taxes, why should Brooklyn bear a disproportionate percentage of social service beds. And before anyone calls me a NIMBYist, Crown Heigts already houses the homeless, mentally ill, registered (and unregistered) sex offenders and criminals who come home to neighborhoods they left decades ago.
As with most people, I know that the socially disenfranchised must be somewhere, so how about we let every borough keep their own. These men are already in Manhattan. They know their environment and what services are available to them. Goodness, this administration is sooo heartless.
We have greedy landlords, career tenants, Eminent Domain, the homeless getting ‘evicted’. Next stop is Hell in a handbasket.
3:36, it’s really easy and witty of you to pick apart, and take out of context, whatever you choose from what someone says. The fact remains that you don’t care anything about the homeless, you care about “proving” that I’m not perfect. Fine, I’m not perfect, never said I was. You are probably the same person that never tires of telling me I should give an apartment to someone homeless to “prove” to you that I am an advocate of affordable housing. I don’t have to do anything of the kind.
If you actually read what I said, I said that SOME would prey on people, not most, not all, some. There is nothing unfactual about that. Desperate people do desperate things. The word “prey” was used on purpose, and I am not going apologise for it to you.
I also never said that hanging out was a crime, but let’s not be so disingenuous as to act as if that behavior is desirable or acceptable in ANYONE’S neighborhood. You would probably be the first to complain about a group of people hanging out on your corner, so let’s not act shocked that the people in my neighborhood, and I, personally, am not fond of the activity.
I have written many times on this subject, and have always advocated space, funding, and other help for the homeless. I don’t think dumping them on my doorstep in even greater numbers helps them, or me. You can call that whatever you choose to call it. I call it my opinion, and my right to have it.
Maybe the reason the per bed cost is so high is because the City insists on using buildings that are not good for temporary housing, such as armories.
“These people will be hanging out on our streets and in parks and subways.”
“These people”, Montrose? Wow, such kind, sensitive language. Last time I checked, streets, parks, and subways were public property and being homeless did not strip one the right to be in any of these places.
“Some will be preying on the rest of us, and some with mental issues may harm themselves and others.”
Preying? You depict these people, who are human beings after all, as animals. You also perpetuate the stereotype of the violent mentally ill. You talk a good game about caring, but this post seems to show your true colors.
It reminds me of Phil Ochs’s prelude to his famous song, “Love Me, I’m a Liberal”, when he says that liberals tend to agree to left of center during good times, and the right of center if an issue affects them personally.
“I have a friend who works in inpatient psych-$1000/night and the city spent $30,000 housing him at the hospital while they looked for other housing for him. There has to be a better way.”
It would have to be a way that doesn’t encourage every other state to send their psyc patients to NYC where they will be more cost-effectively (for the sender) taken care of. That’s what’s behind this. There is a long, long history here. The major psych hospital in CT used to discharge troubled patients directly onto a trend to Grand Central.
Provide $3,000 a month apartments for every homeless person who shows up rather than $1,000 a night hospitals and next thing you know the hospitals will be full again.
It’s what happens when there is a state and local matching cost of these people’s services. Everyone has an incentive to dump.