Why Did Bushwick Burn?

pierre: 21st Feb 2007 - 10:43 GMT

i lived on the corner of Evergreen and Dekalb in the mid 70's. i remember a fire on the opposite corner that took down the whole Dekalb side of the block, something like 10 buildings gone overnight. all the bulidings were attached and mostly wood framed so they burned pretty quickly and no way to stop the fire. the city was also in financial trouble and personally I don't think the city cared. it took alot longer than 10 yrs to rebuild but this was happening in the Bronx as well from what I remember. blocks and blocks of burnt down buildings and empty lots but nobody cared we were only poor blacks and hispanics with no voice.

Brad: 21st Feb 2007 - 18:27 GMT

$$$. Insurance money was a major motivating factor among other problems at the time, in NYC, and in other major cities like Chicago. At least that's what I've read about time and time again, as I wasnt' alive then, nor have I ever lived in New York City. You might be interested in the book "Report from Engine Co. 82" by Dennis Smith. It was written in the '70's while he was working out of Engine 82/Ladder 31 on Intervale Avenue (at Freeman St.) in the Bronx. Also, this site fdnewyork.com/fdnystat.asp has statistics from 1960-1995, so you can really see the increase in fires starting in the late '60s.

Are there still areas that look as bad as they did back then? Last time I was in NYC (November 2005) I went up to the Bronx to in the area of the Engine 82 firehouse and the area looked rough, but much much better than I imagined from stories I had heard.

Peter: 21st Feb 2007 - 19:18 GMT

this is a pretty thought provoking topic, and definitely one that prompted me to also think of the bronx...

check this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bronx#The_Bronx_in_the_movies

apparently, it had alot to do with arson-for-insurance fraud... which would certainly parallel with the fiscal crisis that nyc was going through, as a whole, in the 1970s.

heres another good site that briefly mentions arson in bushwick in the 70s:
www.forgotten-ny.com/STREET%20SCENES/bushwick/bushwick.html

one more:
www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/4/13240/72973

upfromflames: 23rd Feb 2007 - 13:10 GMT

I want to thank you all for your links, especially the fire statistics from Brad. And Pierre, you know well that you are not alone in your experience, in Bushwick, or in NYC. And you are also at least partly right.

Arson was indeed a major contributor to fires at the time, whether on the part of landlords for insurance return or welfare recipients--signs hanging in welfare offices told them in English and Spanish: “The only way to get housing priority is if you are burned out by fire”.

There was also crimes of passion or revenge. If you wanted to get back at someone, it was much easier to burn them out than hurt them personally--even though it hurt so many others.

At the blurrier end of intentional fires, there were those started by kids with nothing better to do. During the 1970's, there were no youth groups in Bushwick, and the vacant building fires were worst in the afternoon.

But that begs a bigger question: how did it get to this point, where landlords had to burn to turn a profit, where welfare families had to risk death to get a better place to live, where kids had nothing better to do than put others lives at risk?

Peter: 23rd Feb 2007 - 14:39 GMT

you know, i just remembered this post. interesting. so what of this exhibition at the historical society? let us know the details as it develops, as i, for one, would like to check it out...

upfromflames: 23rd Feb 2007 - 17:19 GMT

Well, the show is called Up From Flames: Mapping the Recovery of Bushwick 1977-2007

Its focussed on the redelevelopment of Bushwick, as a success of urban planning. Much of the work is being carried out by the Academy for Urban Planning, which is located in Bushwick. They are examining developmental indicators (financial, demographic, construction and remediation) and mapping them out with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping. It is at the same time a unit of study, a public exhibition, and (down the line) a tool to create material for an urban planning curriculum at the school.

This posting is a seperate matter: where I got onto this fire subject was trying to figure out the ruin from which Bushwick had to rebuild. There is not much research on this time and place, so I have been doing much of it myself over the last few months. I wish it could have more of a place in the exihbition, but I hope to post some of it online in the coming months.

Anyhoo, it runs from May 23rd to August 28th at the Brooklyn Historical Society, so check it out.

Sammy: 23rd Feb 2007 - 17:37 GMT

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushwick#Recent_History:_Decline

upfromflames: 24th Feb 2007 - 01:08 GMT

Sammy:

Thanks for that link to wiki's description of Bushwick. It is indeed a good one, but it does repeat the common historical flaw of Bushwick history: the fires associated with the blackout were an effect of the "fire storm" (FDNY term) in Bushwick, not a cause. If you look at the numbers from Brad above fdnewyork.com/fdnystat.asp. The numbers started rising up in the late 1960's, and did not head down signifigantly till the early 1980's.

This is about much more than just July 13, 1977. That was the day that the city, and the world, woke up to what was really going on.

So the question is still hanging...

upfromflames: 24th Feb 2007 - 03:05 GMT

If you might suspect by my oblique approach, there is a controversial answer that I want to approach very carefully...maybe one of you could do it first...

Brad: 24th Feb 2007 - 06:38 GMT

Darn, I'll be in NYC March 11-17th, way before the project is up and running. Will it also be available to view online?

Here is some audio from the FDNY's "War Year's". The 2nd one is from New Year's Eve 1970, the other two I haven't heard, so I'm not sure, I would assume they are from the same night. They probably aren't really any help to your project, but would probably be an interesting listen for you.

www.nycfire.net/system/files/waryears1.wma
www.nycfire.net/system/files/waryears2.wma
www.nycfire.net/system/files/waryears3.wma

upfromflames: 24th Feb 2007 - 14:36 GMT

Brad:

Thanks for those sound clips. They hint at the fog of was that was such a part of this overwhelming time for the FDNY. I think that same fog of war is in part what obscured the causality of the fires.

I'll get back with more on that in a few days, but till then, you might start by looking here www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R0681/. Its a good place to find part of the explanation for fires back then and recently...

As for online, I am on the lookout for a web designer, as you can see from the site that my tasks are not up to the challenge! But it will go up within the next couple of months.

Sammy: 24th Feb 2007 - 20:01 GMT

A controversial answer? You have my curiosity now! Spill the beans! I am intrigued.

upfromflames: 24th Feb 2007 - 23:26 GMT

Well, its a continuum of controversy, on which I, as a young historian working with FDNY vets and active figures in city politics, am trying to place myself on the safe side of.

I'll tell that tale in the coming weeks. But if you would like to know the other end of things, to get a picture of how Drs. Roderick and Debra Wallace portray events, you can read up on the issue at mediafilter.org/MFF/S.35.Burn.html.

Sammy: 25th Feb 2007 - 06:18 GMT

Upfromflames, as a New Yorker, I feel that youre really onto something here. What an enlightening read that last link was. I didn't even know that had gone on. This is growing into a fascinating expose, of sorts. I really hope you continue to develop this theme here. I'm sure I'm not the only one out there thats both fascinated by this and interested in what you have to say. Keep it up. I'm very glad youre speaking out. When people know about something, and take the time to share it with the general public in an intelligent way, well, thats good.

upfromflames: 25th Feb 2007 - 06:27 GMT

for those interested in learning more about the ideas of roderick and debra wallace...

www.amazon.com/Plague-Your-Houses-National-Haymarket/dp/1859842534/sr=8-1/qid=1172384799/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-7996055-3408129?ie=UTF8&s=books

upfromflames: 26th Feb 2007 - 00:45 GMT

The Urban Ecology of Arson
The power of the Wallace's interpretation is its integrated systems approach.

just as flames cannot burn in a vacuum, the flames of July 13th did not arise out of nowhere. There was
more than sufficient fuel for the flames in Bushwick by 1977.

I believe that rather than the malicious intent of planned shrinkage on the part of the city, that the what happened in Bushwick was more an issue of an inability of a bureaucracy to keep pace with a rapidly shifting demographic and economic makeup of NYC.

The census, 10 year affairs of tedious official counts, could in any way keep up with community needs. In 1969, The federal govt turned down Bushwick for "Model Cities" federal funding because it was on paper a white Italian middle and working class community--while in reality it had shifted (partially) to a poor Black and Latino community. It did not happen overnight, but it happened to fast for govt, just as today the feds can't keep up with Bushwick's population of illegal immigrants and their need for social services.

With that, I leave you this quote from the Wallace's paper "Urban fire as an Unstabilized Parasite: The 1976-1978 outbreak in Bushwick" from Environment and PLanning A, published February 1982.

In previous decades the majority of homes wre owner-occupied and the multiple dwellings were well maintained. During the 1960’s and 70’s the real estate corporations bought one family and two family homes and the multiple dwellings. Illegal subdivision of the small houses turned them into warrens for four and eight families and maintenance of the legal multiple dwellings decreased sharply. Welfare recipients ere funneled into these buildings and rent collected without the rendering of even minimal services and maintenance. The combination of dangerously increased population density, deterioration of housing, and the day to day management of buildings, coupled with the withdrawal of municipal services, made an increase in the number and size of fires almost inevitable…[by mid-1975] all could see that the fires were no longer controlled.
(Wallace and Wallace 1983)

I'll try to keep graphs to a minimum! This is just to demonstrate the urban ecology pattern.

more on the Rand Institute soon...

visit up from flames at the Brooklyn Historical Society May 23--Aug 28

upfromflames: 27th Feb 2007 - 03:04 GMT

Planned Shrinkage was no accident: It was a well planned and thought out concept. Faced with a shortage of funds and a number of deteriorating neighborhoods, the city’s Housing Development Commissioner, Roger Starr, basically said: let things get worse before they gets better. Things will get worse by them selves if we just leave things alone. And when they get bad enough, which means more open space, cheaper, and easier development Then we’ll devote resources to it.

Effectively, that meant a loss of sanitation, code enforcement, parks, police, and yes, FDNY…

And it worked.

Of course, Bushwick did not burn because of planned shrinkage. But just when the Bushwick most needed the city, the city did not need Bushwick. And so Bushwick burned…

PS: Maybe that's why the dept. is now called Housing Preservation and Development---not just development!

anon (localhost): 28th Feb 2007 - 17:13 GMT

a lot of it was highly socio~economic if you wanna get into the really deep meaning of it. If you wanna get to the nutz and bolts of it, Id suggest a call to the Fire Museum on Spring St. There SHOULD still be a volunteer there whos a retired FDNY Fireman of the era. Though he was South Bronx/Manhattan. Im sure you can make the comparison to any of the Boroughs that were devastated during *the war years*.
See thats the interesting part. Someone with a degree will tell you one story. Someone who was THERE will tell you another. It might be interesting to get both.

upfromflames: 1st Mar 2007 - 04:04 GMT

I don't think the only difference is having a degree or not. Its about having been there or not been there.
And you gotta be of a certain age for that that I am not quite at.

There are many open and honest FDNY veterans to be found who will talk about this stuff, at the fire museum or elsewhere. I've had conversations with Jon Knox and Jack Carney (whose recollections can be found @ www.amazon.com/Heat-Fire-C-S-I-Arson-Murder/dp/1560255293)

but no exhibits. Its not quite palatable for public memory quite yet, it seems to me.

Because it is an emotionally charged issue, from an incredibly divisive time, I feel it should be approached with a careful concern for language and accuracy. Thats why the balance of a shared site like this is so ideal a place to chew over this issue.

Sammy: 1st Mar 2007 - 04:12 GMT

I just purchased that book. Fascinating. Thanks for the link. Any other links to info? You are most certainly not the only one following this topic.

upfromflames: 1st Mar 2007 - 13:32 GMT

A stinging chapter from the Wallaces' book: Benign Neglect and Planned Shrinkage
www.nyenvirolaw.org/PDF/Wallace-aPlagueOnOurHouses-Chapter2.pdf

John Dereszewski: 4th Mar 2007 - 21:41 GMT

In a recent post, you noted that Bushwick was denied Model City designation in 1969. I believe that a key reason for this had less to do with either the Federal Government's or the Lindsay administration's position than it did with local indifference - or even opposition - to this designation. Let's remember that, at that time, the local political powers that be was the old, mostly Italian, establishment who were not interested in developing housing for populations that were not part of their immediate constituency. Thus without the vital variable of strong local support, it was not surprising that Bushwick did not make the cut. In my view, strong support for designation would have at least called uncritical reliance upon the 1960 census data into serious question. But this did not happen, and Bushwick was left out.

upfromflames: 5th Mar 2007 - 23:56 GMT

Jon: Thanks for your informed contribution.
That makes more sense to me than just bureaucratic bungling

In terms of fight or flight, most of the Italians took straight to LI.
For those that stayed,their power was restricted to block associations, that could not reach the city level.
For those that were coming into the area, they did not yet have any organization to represent them.
In the bigger picture, that is what made the growth of Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Citizen Care Council (RBSCC) such an important element of rebuilding Bushwick.

John Dereszewski: 6th Mar 2007 - 11:49 GMT

The vacuum of any strong community organizations in Bushwick, at least until the rise of the Ridgewood Bushwick Senior Council, had two consequences in the 1970's. One, it made Bushwick especially dependent on directly provided government physical development, particularly from HPD and the NYC Housing Authority. Second, it established, if only by default, local Community Board 4 as the prime local player in the establishment of such development. The fact that the board and the City agencies made it their business to closely coordinate these efforts greatly enhanced their effectiveness.

This, by the way, is not to say that Bushwick contained NO other effective organizations during the 70's. In fact, if it had not been for strong local efforts, many of Bushwick's day care and head start centers would not have been established. But in the area of physical development, the pickings were pretty thin.

(A little public disclosure. During the late 1970's, I served as CB 4's District Manager, so my viewpoint is not entirely dispassionate; however, I do believe I am correct on the facts.)