atlanticbedford-armory.JPG
There’s no reason for Park Slope to be running circles around Crown Heights—at least as far as the neighborhoods’ respective armories are concerned. That’s the case Councilwoman Letitia James has been making lately by saying the armory on Bedford and Atlantic, which currently houses a men’s homeless shelter, should be revamped with a youth-oriented athletic center a la the Park Slope armory’s recent renovation. James stumped for the idea when she met with Deputy Mayor Patti Harris last week and is also trying to rally broader community support for the proposal. The councilwoman envisions a track-and-field facility aimed at young adults that would further benefit the community by improving the area’s social milieu. It’s offensive to me to drive by Atlantic and Bedford and see all the panhandlers outside, she says. It’s an eyesore.
The Future of the Atlantic Armory? [Brownstoner]
Last Lap for Park Slope Armory Renovation [Brownstoner]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. I am not saying that some placement might not have to do with political power but the main reason for this seemingly uneven placement has to do with the constituents being served (please provide one example of a facility in the Crown Heights/Bed-Stuy/Brownsville area that is serving people ‘shipped’ in from distant areas).

    If you are from Bed-Stuy and you are homeless and they shipped you off to some other distant area for shelter, people would complain they were warehousing the homeless away from their neighborhoods and families.

    Also there is an economic reality too – if you want to effectively treat mental illness does it make sense to spend 10x as much on rent/land costs vs. treatment?

    And again – the vast vast majority of the facilities in the neighborhoods described (public or private) are serving the people in those areas (obviously not block by block). The “private” facilities you refer are generally non-profits and funded through govt assistance programs, Medicade, SSI and other similar grants.

    As for Lindsay Lohan, I promise no matter how much coke she puts up her gorgeous little nose – she will NEVER be in a treatment facility whose placement was dictated by the city, state or Federal govt.

  2. So because wealthier people can afford to go to private facilities, their neighborhoods shouldn’t bear the societal responsibility of having both public and private facilities? Because it’s not just government facilities that are in our neighborhoods, we have private ones too.

    Might I add that those of us in poorer neighborhoods still pay taxes, and are still supposed to be equal citizens in this great republic. Not everyone in Brooklyn Hts who is mentally ill goes to a sanitarium in the Berkshires, any more than every homeless man in the 23rd Regiment Armory lives in Crown Heights.

    One might also comment that Lindsay Lohan might do better at the Bushwick facility, her swank private vacation spot hasn’t been too effective. This only highlights that substance abuse, like all of society’s ills, is complicated, and not easily treated. Perhaps spreading out facilities, having smaller shelters, drop in centers, etc, spread out where all who need them, from all neighborhoods, would be much more of a good use of our tax dollars than dumping everyone into already underserved and underfunded neighborhoods.

  3. Actually while your correct that mental illness, domestic abuse and substance abuse cut through all segments of society, there prevelance and effects are more pronounced in poorer areas; and most importantly for this issue – GOVERNMENT facilities required to address these problems are far more necessary and utilized by poorer constituents. (By way of example – Lindsay Lohan may be a white drug abuser but she goes to a private facility in Utah not a Govt sponsored one in Bushwick)

  4. Granted, although not exactly a quid pro quo system here. The mentally ill, substance abuse and battered women’s shelters certainly cut through all segments of society. Please don’t try to imply that poorer communities “deserve” to have a disproportionate number of facilities in our areas. That just ain’t so.

  5. They put the social service facilities in the areas where they are needed.
    I’d guess there arent that many former Brooklyn Heights residents who are homeless and I’d also guess that the number of Park Slope felons who get released to halfway houses is relatively tiny.

  6. Homeless people need shelter. I’m sure Tish would be the first to advocate that. There is enough room in this place to have a shelter, and still have room for an enormous space designed for the community. I may be wrong, but I think the armory on Jefferson Ave in Bed Stuy functions as both.

    Crown Heights (and Bed Stuy) are oversaturated with shelters, drug rehab clinics, half way houses, and other facilities. They are all necessary in a civilized society, but they don’t have to all be right here. Other communities need to share in the care of people who are from all communities. We just got another state run live-in facility approved for another of our prime residential blocks. Enough is enough. We don’t need the distinction of having the largest men’s shelter in the city. We can take care of our share of those who need help, and let other neighborhoods step up to the plate. This is not NIMBY on our part, or on Tish’s part. We are already AIOBY – all in our backyard.

    Let’s do something the entire community can share in. Reuse of most of, or all of, the Armory would be an amazing boost for Crown Heights North.

1 2