475 Kent Avenue: How It All Began

OK, so the city found something that had been there forever directly under their noses and overreacted.

They figured: “well shit, what if someone flicks a cigarette butt into these things and the whole building goes up in flames… then we’d have to explain WHY we didn’t do anything when it was an obvious problem and then we would have all these lawsuits on our hands”.

I mean, can you imagine the field day if anything HAD happened? I can see the post headlines now. And the times. And the DN. And NY1. And so on.

What I think is reprehensible is that anyone who knew about the conditions would allow them to exist without doing anything – effectively looking the other way while endangering lives, health, safety, quality of life, etc. This includes the landlord AND any tenants who were aware that conditions there were shit. It blows me away that given the crap condition of the building, none of the residents called the DOB to report violations.

And now the residents (“residents” is a better term than “tenants” – no mistake that they weren’t “commercial” tenants), who most likely knew that their apartments were illegal are pissed that their sweet deal was blown. I’m not sure how anyone with an ounce of common sense could think it was at all legal. And I also know a couple with a baby who lived there and I feel especially bad for them, however, my personal childrearing opinions aside (why would anyone opt to raise their kid in such a place – if they knew about the conditions at the building, and it was hard to miss the dilapidation, grafitti, garbage, disrepair, etc., then they leave something to be desired in terms of looking out for the well being of their child).

The whole excuse of “we’re poor so we can’t afford to move” is bullshit. If you’re poor, get a safe, habitable, legal apartment in queens or further out in Brooklyn where rent is lower than trendy Williamsburg.

I feel really sorry for everyone involved, regardless of any willful ignorance, EXCEPT for the landlord. He should be thrown into his grain, eaten alive by the rats and then burned.

Gosh, as a long term resident of 475 Kent, I cannot begin to say how very much many of the comments above sadden me, especially those of 11:00.

The chain of events of that Sunday evening, the history of the 10 or so years leading up to it/them, the actual condition of the building (and the basement) that day and before, the City’s response then and since, the specific provisions of the building code and safety code involved are not, at least to my mind, easy to reduce to a few simple easy-to-run off at the mouth with facts. Even if we leave out all the hot button issues about what “artists” might or might not have “coming to them” (good or bad). Or how their reasonable expectations ought or ought not differ from “normal” people or “poor” people, etc.

Let me just say this, I think most of us (indeed probably all of us) are quite as concerned as anyone about the lives of rescue workers and fire fighters, and especially whenever they are put on the line to save others in an actual emergency.

As for the owners of the building, let us just say, I have trouble, at least in the abstract, thinking their conduct was any more reprehensible that GM or Ford or Phillip Morris– and I don’t think it is entirely unfair to say that in terms of building maintenance, the basic philosophy was to do as little as possible, as slowly as possible, at the lowest possible cost, BUT that much they did or tried to do. (The whole story, even of the basic big picture is way way way more complicated, and involves, for instance, an enormous amount of above-code standards improvements made to much of the building’s infrastructure by long term rental tenants beginning in 1998). Bottom line, they are not bad guys, they are not “the bad guys,” and during the course of the past ten years fire, building, health inspectors, policemen, postal workers, and every imaginable other sort of government employee has regularly inspected every foot of the building (including the now legendary seasonal matzoh making ovens and the rest of the buildings basement), and whatever citations were issued, nothing about the building was thought life-threatening in any way. As for the uses and occupancy of the building– no aspect of it was clandestine in any way, and all city agencies were fully aware of who was there and on what basis.

The nub of the issue, at least to many us is fairly straight forward:

1) was the use of an emergency evaculation procedure proper (during a holiday weekend, at night, when no independent review, say, by a court, was remotely practicable)? The larger question here is simply whether the usual due process protections that apply in civil actions like eviction proceedings can be circumvented in this way.

2) Is it time for the city to face up to the large policy questions of mixed use buildings in which people want to BOTH live and work? And to create avenues by which the owners and tenants of buildings can reasonably comply at reasonable cost within a reasonable timeframe with all applicable laws and regulations? The last time this sort of policy crisis came up was at the end of the 1970s with regard to the newly prosperous neighborhoods of Soho and Tribeca and the Loft Law was the result. Since then, there has been a kind of “Don’t ask Don’t tell” regime with regard to the many hundreds of buildings that are like 475 Kent, particularly in other boroughs.

3) And, in almost every way, far less important (except to those of us directly affected), how much sense was there to the approach taken that Sunday night? How dangerous were those particular bins of grain (“silo” accidents involving grain are well documented, but the bins in the basement weren’t quite in the same majestic league as the Buffalo, New York grain elevators that le Corbusier found so inspiring). How sensible was the cure? About fifty of us were ready, willing and able to go downstairs with shovels at 6pm, if it could have averted the– to us much more compelling clear and present danger of serious injury presented by 200 people in panic descending a single staircase already crowded with employees of the Red Cross, OEM, Police and Fire Department. (As for the way the dangerous grain was actually removed the following Wednesday, when various bureaucratic obstacles were finally surmounted– an old truck and a malfunctioning vacuum device, which set off a trail of sparks halfway through the operation, my person safety vote would have gone to guys with shovels). As for the sprinkler question (the other major factual premise for the emergency evacuation), all I can say is that experts have disagreed for ten years about whether we needed it functional or not– the building is a “daylight factory” of a kind built following the infamous Triangle Shirt Factory fire, and with foot thick cement walls and floors was intended to be an essentially “fireproof” structure.

Bottom line, all of us in the building (owners and tenants together) along with some very decent folks at various city agencies are doing all we can to correct problems, eliminate dangers, and comply with applicable law. It won’t be easy. But right now, today, it seems possible if everyone involved can remain calm and focused and brings as much good will as they can to table each day for months to come.

It would have been nice if what the applicable law actually was had been a bit clearer a bit sooner to allow remedies without so much pain and such high costs to so many. But then what “law” is isn’t so simple– jaywalking is “illegal;” littering is “illegal.” The city seemed to have an enforcement policy with respect to C of O questions– at least between 2000-2007– which may now– with no public discussion of any kind– be very different from what it has been. Kind of a shift from zero enforcement to zero tolerance for violations. Since so many 1000s of New York lives are potentially affected, perhaps a little transparency is in order. Perhaps the quasi-military surpise holiday weekend raid is not the best possible approach.

But please, give the mean spirited stuff a break.

The city should be closing down unsafe buildings. The politicians who are pandering to the former residents of this building should concentrate harder on affordable housing in NYC. Why do creative types think they have more rights?

Kosher does not mean that a Rabbi blesses the food. The food is not blessed by a Rabbi. Go to http://www.chabad.org/kosher to find out what kosher is.