Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 54
  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default Brooklyn Is Burning

    In the midst of the building boom, a fire epidemic of a kind not seen since 1977 is raging. Do development and arson go hand in hand?

    http://nymag.com/realestate/features/21339/index.html



    It was a fire seen all over the metropolis, a dark, spreading plume visible even down at City Hall, should the mayor have looked out his window on the bright spring morning of May 2.

    Once upon another kind of New York time, the East River waterfront occupied by the Greenpoint Terminal Market was a shipyard. The U.S.S. Monitor, the doughty little ironclad that fought to save the Union against the Merrimack, was built there. Circa 1890, the American Manufacturing Company, then the world’s leading maker of rope, built its factory on the site. In 1913, the company had more than 2,000 workers and was the second-largest employer in Brooklyn.

    More recently, the sprawling fourteen-acre complex of seventeen buildings fell into postindustrial disuse, only to be retrofitted into one last bit of Big City functionality: Along with the rats and toxic mold, the terminal became a sub-rosa Art Land for squatters and punks. People with metal objects shoved through their skin moshed the night away to bands with the word death in their names. Skateboarders gleamed giant cubes through the rusting fun house, then thrashed the “sky bridges” over West Street. It was just so Blade Runner.

    Now it was all going up in smoke. It would take ten alarms, 80 pieces of FDNY apparatus, and 400 firefighters 36 hours to bring the blaze under control. It was the city’s biggest single fire in more than a decade, the most extensive department operation since 9/11. When it was over, everyone—firemen, cops, Billyburg photo bloggers, and remaining old-line neighborhood residents alike—agreed on one thing: That was no accident.

    No way it could have been anything else. Not right here in the middle of the biggest land rush to hit the fabled County of Kings since Barbra Streisand and Bobby Fischer moved to their own separate beats along the same buffed Erasmus hallways, not when ****-yellow Tyvek towers seem to sprout from every lot along the BQE. And is it any news flash that fire, elemental to the natural cycle of things in the primordial forest, is an equally eternal part of the New York real-estate business? That in the grand symphony of the city, the jackhammer and the siren play an indivisible duet?

    The Terminal Market was probably the ¬second-largest single property on the erstwhile low-slung, bum-infested Greenpoint-Williamsburg waterfront, which had in 2005 been rezoned by the Bloomberg government for “density.” “Density” meant the owner, one Joshua Guttman of Lawrence, Long Island, who bought the tottering complex in 2001 for a paltry $25 million, was free to become really, really rich. Indeed, Guttman, who had once commissioned plans for building 2.6 million feet of luxury high-rises on the site, had recently struck a deal to sell the property for $420 million. (Down from the $481 million he asked on Craigslist, a number that no doubt stood out from the usual massage-parlor come-ons.)

    But wait! An unexpected fly in this opulent ointment appeared in the form of the preservationist Municipal Art Society, which strongly recommended that the terminal be landmarked as part of New York’s rapidly dwindling industrial heritage. For a developer like Guttman, landmarking is akin to a mirror in the sight of Count Dracula, since changes (which would include bulldozing an old factory and replacing it with a 35-story luxury condo) to a structure so designated would be subject to approval by committees of flinty-eyed, blue-haired lady do-gooders. Guttman’s $420 million deal fell through. It was shortly after that that smoke began to fill the sky over the East River. (There is no evidence that Guttman is in any way involved. “Mr. Guttman has never been charged with any arson-related crimes,” his lawyer, Israel Goldberg, said to the Times.) And, as one heartbroken would-be preservationist from the Municipal Art Society said, “that was pretty much that, because you don’t landmark a hole in the ground.”

    The fact is we’re in a burning season. Uniformed Firefighters Association stats say the 2006 “fire season”—the winter months when items like electric blankets and space heaters are in operation—saw an increase in “greater” blazes (of two alarms or more) of 50 percent over the record year 2005.

    The market blaze was only one of the many, many “suspicious” fires to hit the Brooklyn development zones of late. Within three months, from December 7, 2005, to February 24, 2006, there were eleven such fires along Prospect Heights’ “Pacific Street Corridor,” formerly home to single-story factories and flat-fix establishments but now part of the realty zone sandwiched between the escalating rent sprawl of Williamsburg and Fort Greene and the proposed Atlantic Yards megaproject to the West.

    Location, location, location. The proximity of the afflicted Prospect Heights addresses raises eyebrows: 1033 Pacific, 1084 Pacific, 1198 Pacific, 1440 Pacific. Other fires were around the corner, at 530 and 600 St. Marks Avenue. Two more occurred at 461 and 658 Park Place, with another at nearby 683 Dean Street.



    (1) January 1, 2005 3 a.m.901 Washington Avenue An all-hands fire caused by a man’s setting himself ablaze, taking his own life along with a woman and her two children. A fifth victim, who carried her young nephew to safety, dies months later.
    (2) February 24, 2005 5:42 a.m.1154 Pacific Street An accidental, all-hands fire causes one minor injury.
    (3) December 7, 2005 6:50 a.m. 1084 Pacific Street An all-hands fire kills Aubrey Mack, a 48-year-old homeless squatter. The cause is not ascertained.
    (4) December 11, 2005 10:14 a.m. 658 Park Place The fire chief on the scene determines this all-hands fire not to be suspicious. No injuries reported.
    (5) December 17, 2005 10:46 p.m. 683 Dean Street An all-hands fire caused by careless smoking injures five.
    (6) January 5, 2006 10:16 a.m. 530 St. Marks Avenue An all-hands fire caused by a candle; no reported injuries.
    (7) January 6, 2006 5:20 a.m.461 Park Place A two-alarm arson fire; no reported injuries.
    (8) January 7, 2006 10:19 a.m.600 St. Marks Avenue A two-alarm arson fire guts a brownstone later linked to a $12 million mortgage-fraud scheme.
    (9) January 8, 2006 6:01 a.m.784 Prospect Place An all-hands arson fire; no injuries reported.
    (10) January 29, 2006 12:17 p.m.530 St. Marks Avenue An all-hands arson fire burns the building vacated by the candle fire.
    (11) February 7, 2006 10:33 a.m.1198 Pacific Street The fire chief on the scene determines a welding problem to be the cause of an all-hands fire. No injuries reported.
    (12) February 19, 2006 4:44 a.m.1440 Pacific Street More than 140 firefighters battle a three-alarm fire for some four hours. All 54 residents manage to escape.
    (13) February 24, 2006 5:16 a.m. 1033 Pacific Street A three-alarm arson fire kills four and forces a family of seven to jump from their second-floor window.
    On Scene Photography (3); John Fischetti)

    In the worst of these, the three-alarm arson fire at 1033 Pacific, a dowdy four-story apartment that had been sold and resold several times prior to the blaze (the deed shifting from 1033 Pacific Partner LLC to the 1033 Pacific Partners LLC), four people died. These included Assita Coulibaly, a 36-year-old immigrant from Burkina Faso, and two of her small children. Also dead was 24-year-old Sherrie Williams, who jumped from the fourth-story window. She landed on the concrete stairwell; another jumping tenant, Kassoum Fofana, fell on top of her, possibly saving his life. Months later, the building remained burned out, Williams’s name handwritten on the still-extant row of buzzers.

    This was part of a larger pattern. According to FDNY stats, 2005 was the single busiest year in Fire Department history, with a total of 485,702 calls answered. This beat out the former record of 459,567 calls, set back in 1977.

    You remember 1977, right?

    That was when Howard Cosell, in pre-hip-hop cadences not unlike those employed by Raymond Burr describing Godzilla’s death march through Tokyo, interrupted the play-by-play of the World Series to declare, “The Bronx is burning.”

    Those were the Fear City days, when Fort Apache’s territory was populated by miscreants like Joe Bald, who ran “a fire for hire” service that collected millions in insurance booty for landlords desperate to cash out of dying neighborhoods, and legendary pyro “Gasoline Gomez.” Accused of torching hundreds of buildings throughout Morrisania, Gomez is said to have loved to taunt firefighters with his “signature” blazes. One afternoon, he apparently lit a cigarette too close to his gas can, blowing himself out a third-story window. He survived, after which, according to one story, he was actually acquitted of arson.

    “It was like the Khmer Rouge had come to town,” remembers one resident of Fox Street, marching ground of gangs like the Savage Skulls. “I was maybe 8, and this guy was in the lobby of my building with a can of kerosene. I pleaded with him not to torch the place because my parents were upstairs. ‘Okay, kid,’ the guy smiled, patted me on the head, and left. He went across the street and set that building on fire.”

    That was the bankrupted nadir of then—the Abe Beame days of “white flight,” disco, and junkies running down the fire escape with your tinfoiled-rabbit-ear TV set. It was a time when arson, the ***-end of the real-estate cycle, seemed the fitting last flare of a fallen municipality.

    But this is not then; this is the total fabulousness of now—29 years past Cosell’s comment, after Rudy’s Wyatt Earp–on–42nd Street act, far into the supposed Bloomberg boom. A town as haute as ours is not supposed to be on fire.

    Paranoia—accompanied by myriad conspiracy theories—is striking deep in what is now routinely called “the Brooklyn burndown zone.” You hear assertions that the fix is in, that the city and developers have entered into some unholy, unspoken Katrina-esque bargain to clear out those in the way of ever-higher rises and rents. Such thinking was only encouraged by the strange aftermath of the Greenpoint market fire. With many an accusing middle finger thrust at owner Guttman (whose suddenly worth-a-fortune artist-loft properties in Dumbo burned down suspiciously in 2004), the authorities declared they had their man, i.e., one Leszek Kuczera, a 59-year-old homeless alcoholic known in the bars of still-Polish Greenpoint. Cops reported Kuczera had confessed to setting the fire while burning the insulation off copper wire he had hoped to sell for $1.25 a pound—a scavenging practice known as “mungo.”

    Amid much guffawing that he’d been fitted for a classic fall guy—one former fire marshal said, “If that’s a mungo fire, its the biggest mungo fire in history”—Kuczera soon unconfessed. According to Sam Getz, Kuczera’s Legal Aid lawyer, his client, who speaks very little English, was “hung over” when questioned and his “confession” was nothing more than a jumbled memory of a different fire that had occurred the year before. Plus Kuczera had an alibi. Zbigniew Sarna, a contractor living in Pond Eddy, a small upstate town, near Monticello, swears Kuczera was working for him the morning of the fire.

    This is how it works now, with so much money hungriness,” says June Davis, an “over 40” child-care worker originally from Port-of-Spain, Trinidad. Davis had followed the Greenpoint fire story in the paper but didn’t think all that much about it. She had fire problems of her own. On March 28, a suspicious fire in her building at 1299 Eastern Parkway burned her out of the one-bedroom apartment she’d lived in for eleven years, most recently with her daughter and grandchild.

    The three-alarm blaze that required the services of 138 firefighters and rousted some 30 families started near the roof.


    (On Scene Photography) 1245 Eastern Parkway in flames.

    “I heard someone saying, ‘Fire … fire,’ ” Davis remembers. “It wasn’t loud, just a low, sad cry. Then there was crashing, glass shattering. I ran, took nothing, just ran out.”

    That was the beginning of what Davis calls “my displacement,” a journey that currently has her living in the Amboy Street Shelter, a bleak series of low brick buildings in Brownsville where the Department of Housing Preservation and Development has long relocated people uprooted by fire.

    “Amboy Street is famous, like the Rikers Island of fire,” says one current resident, still dripping wet in the 100-degree heat after an afternoon dip in the pool at nearby Betsy Head park. “I was living near Bushwick. I knew the landlord wanted the people out. The rents were too low. One day, this guy comes by. ‘Can you fix my ceiling?’ I asked. He told me to shut up or I’d find myself living on Amboy Street. I didn’t know what he meant, but after the building burned, I found out.”

    Watching Jeopardy! in the kitchen of her modest fourth-floor walk-up at 199 Amboy, Davis continues to pay the $1 a month that the city says will guarantee she can return to 1299 Eastern Parkway when the building is repaired. But she is “not that optimistic.” After the fire, when she went back to retrieve her possessions, a man claiming to be the super extorted $70 from her just to let her in the door. Inside, she found all her jewelry had been stolen. “They even took the bottles of rum I brought back from Trinidad.

    “I am not a child,” says Davis. “I go to work every day. I am a responsible citizen, not a drug addict or someone who was evicted. I always paid my rent … Fire is sinister. It spreads inside your mind. It haunts you. The stress I feel now is like that.

    “Neighborhoods like mine are changing. The landlords want to attract the tourists, people from Manhattan or wherever. Even if I get back into my apartment, chances are the rent will be much higher. It is the same in Harlem, Bed-Stuy. I am not saying anyone did anything. All I know is my home is gone, and now I am here, like a refugee. Because that is what this place is, a refugee camp right here in New York City.”

    Bill Batson has strong views on what’s behind Brooklyn’s fire epidemic. “You can’t compare the Brooklyn burnout of 2006 with what happened in the South Bronx,” he says. “But it is just as insidious because it shows how the city has abdicated public authority to private real-estate interests. This is the politics of overdevelopment in the Bloomberg era.”

    Batson first came to Prospect Heights as a Pratt painting major in 1979, and recently could be found in neighborhood hangouts like Tom’s Restaurant on Washington Avenue campaigning for the State Assembly in the 57th district on what he calls “the anti-Disneyfication-of-Brooklyn-through-arson platform.” (Batson lost the primary.) A mixed-race bohemian presence amid the ethnic imperative of Kings County politics (childhood memories include being bitten by blind jazzman Al Hibbler’s seeing-eye dog), Batson, like most “fire activists,” became radicalized in 2003 when the Bloomberg administration closed six firehouses, four of them in Brooklyn. The closings met with a near-universal outcry, including a monthlong 24/7 sit-in at Engine Company 212 in Williamsburg.

    As signaled by the whiff of festering feta cheese over grid-blown Astoria, runaway development without the requisite expansion of infrastructure and services is a coming issue for anti-Bloombergians like Prospect Heights City Council member Letitia James, who says, “If you’d told me I’d miss Giuliani, I would have said you were crazy.” When the lack of adequate resources includes fire protection, this becomes “mad-scientist city planning,” says James. “A recipe for disaster.”

    With things as they are, the fire committee of Community Board 8, responsible for Prospect Heights, stands ever vigilant. It’s co-chaired by Batson and the five-foot-tall demon letter writer Holly Fuchs Ferguson, a secretary of the Society of Old Brooklynites (SOB), and bolstered by 100 percent engaged, 100 percent enraged old-school activists like Connie Lesold, Josefina Sanfeliú of Latinas Against Fire Cuts, and 72-year-old Doris Heriveaux, who in 2004 was burned out of her apartment of 22 years by an arson at 852 Classon Avenue.

    No one was arrested in the fire at 852 Classon, but Heriveaux says that doesn’t matter. “Everyone had to move out. The building needed to be renovated. The idea was, you had to leave.” But Heriveaux did not want to move. “I raised my children in that apartment. It was home.” She took the landlord to court and managed to win the right to move back into the building at the same $800 rent. It took almost two years, but it was worth it, says Heriveaux, since all the new tenants are paying over $2,000 a month more for similar apartments.

    This is fairly typical in torched buildings, say Community Board 8 fire-committee members. “The buildings burn down, and the rent goes up,” says Lesold. Many of the fire committee’s meetings concern seemingly prosaic FDNY operational issues like “response time”—the duration between when a company gets a call and the time it arrives on the scene.

    No issue, however, raises the ire of activists like the mayor’s assault on the fire marshal’s office does. It is a fire marshal who figures out how a fire started and whether it was set on purpose. By law, no fire can be certified as an arson unless a marshal files a report saying it is.

    “This job is not for everyone,” says one marshal. But for the meticulous few who, through copious interviews and analysis of factors like “accelerant residue” and “burn patterns,” determine whether fire was the result of an “incendiary” process, the job has deep rewards.

    Ed Burke, who was a Brooklyn firefighter and spent eleven years as a fire marshal, says that what’s going on at his old job is “unbelievable … You think it can’t get worse, then it does.”

    “When you hear Chief Fire Marshal Garcia in front of the City Council saying arsons are not up, I just have to laugh,” says Burke. “Of course arsons are not up. How could they be up when only a fire marshal can call a fire arson, and there aren’t any fire marshals? Back in the late eighties, around the time of the Happy Land fire, there were something like 400 marshals. In the middle nineties, we had 292. Now we’re down to 80, and 20 supervisors. That means that at any given time, you’ve got 35 or so guys actually working, and two of those are Scoppetta’s bodyguards. And only eight of them are in the field.

    “We investigated every fire, from a garbage can in a project hallway to a brush fire in Staten Island. Now we don’t. They stopped investigating all car fires until people started screaming. If you once looked at 1,000 fires and now you look at 500 or 250, that knocks out three quarters of your potential arsons right there. It’s sick what they’re doing with those numbers.”

    Another marshal, still on the job, says, “The department keeps saying, ‘We’re doing more with less,’ but they never say exactly how much less is less. At night, when most of the fires happen, we have exactly four fire marshals working.

    “Four! Four guys, in two cars, for the whole city!

    “I am not a conspiracy guy, but you can’t help thinking they made a conscious decision to get rid of us. It bothers me, because those fires on Pacific Street were extraordinary. In almost every case, you had doors kicked in and gasoline spread so flames immediately made their way up the staircase. Staircase fires are terrible. You can’t get out, people panic. The fire at 1033, where people died—we were late on that one. It had to do with our pagers. They suck. The mood here is very, very strained. It’s enough to make you cry.”

    It is also enough to make people wonder what exactly Mike Bloomberg has against the New York City Fire Department. A sweaty officer climbing out of a smoking Brooklyn manhole in the 102-degree August heat expresses the near-unanimous opinion: “Since Bloomberg showed up, we’ve gone from heroes to zeros. That guy has tried to screw us every way possible.”

    A couple of mornings later, Bill Batson, Connie Lesold, and Holly Fuchs Ferguson held their weekly 5:30 a.m. vigil in front of 1033 Pacific Street. That’s when the fire that killed Sherrie Williams and the others broke out, so that’s when the fire committee pays its respects.

    Attending vigils is a fire-committee duty. Only the night before, Lesold and Josefina Sanfeliú made their way to 103-15 169th Street in Queens. This was a bad one: five buildings burned, two dead. Marshals declared the fire an arson. Adding to the shock was the fact that the wood-frame houses had been demolished within 24 hours. Nothing remained but an acre of dirt, as flat as an Iowa cornfield, surrounded by a fence.

    About 100 neighborhood residents holding candles assembled by the fence. Some said the fire was the result of a dispute between tenants and the landlord of one of the buildings. Whatever the reason, everyone agreed neither of the people killed, 83-year-old James Crocker and his son’s girlfriend, Alexandria Roberts, were involved. Again, the horror of arson’s uncontrolled, random criminality was manifest. If the quarreling parties had simply shot each other in the head, they’d be dead, sure. But everyone else would be alive, and the 50 or so displaced people would still have a place to live.

    Local City Council member Leroy Comrie addressed the mourners. “I’m not a preacher,” he said in flat tones. “But I’ll tell you one thing, this neighborhood is under siege. We’ve been rezoned here. We’re in the sights of real-estate speculators. We have to pull together so this doesn’t happen ever again.”

    People nodded their heads wanly. Said one unconvinced resident, “Sure, we got to stop it. But how?”

    Back in Brooklyn, Ferguson was watering the plants in front of the empty 1033 Pacific Street. Keeping the flowers healthy shows someone cares, the Community Board 8 members say.

    “Fight the blight,” said Ferguson while checking basement doors on an adjacent building. “If the doors are left open, people start hanging out. Then, wham, it’s on fire.”

    There was some news on Pacific Street. It was discovered that someone had paid $885,000 for a ramshackle building down the block. Another, less-expected item was that the family of Kassoum Fofana, who’d fallen on top of Sherrie Williams the night of the 1033 fire, had a new apartment. This was good news, since the Fofanas had been more or less homeless since the fire. Weirdly, the Fofanas’ benefactor was the Forest City Ratner Companies, would-be builder of the hated Atlantic Yards project, which may do more than any fire to change the landscape of Brooklyn.

    "Ratner got the Fofanas a place to live,” Batson said, shaking his head at the irony.

    The Community Board 8 fire committee was chewing that one over as an engine company, 219 from Dean Street, roared by pumping full lights and sirens. Something was on fire.

    FTM-PTB
    Last edited by FFFRED; 09-19-2006 at 05:40 PM.


  2. #2
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default Come on Fred...

    According to many experts out here, there just aren't any fires anymore.
    IAFF-IACOJ PROUD

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MIKEYLIKESIT
    According to many experts out here, there just aren't any fires anymore.
    LOL! Your right...My bad.

    FTM-PTB

  4. #4
    Forum Member DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MIKEYLIKESIT
    According to many experts out here, there just aren't any fires anymore.
    Whatever. Many people, including myself, point to the statistical evidence of a nationwide downward trend in the number of actual building fires.

    Nationwide. Which means that somewhere, there are a lot of cities and towns not having as many fires.

    You are the exception to the rule.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  5. #5
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaSharkie
    Whatever. Many people, including myself, point to the statistical evidence of a nationwide downward trend in the number of actual building fires.

    Nationwide. Which means that somewhere, there are a lot of cities and towns not having as many fires.

    You are the exception to the rule.
    I will take your whatever and raise you a whatever.
    IAFF-IACOJ PROUD

  6. #6
    FossilMedic
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    metro Washingon DC
    Posts
    526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    In the midst of the building boom, a fire epidemic of a kind not seen since 1977 is raging. Do development and arson go hand in hand?
    Yes, based on a century of urban development history.

    Andrew Fredericks made an FDIC presentation "Don't Worry 'bout That Nozzle, Kid, 'cause We Don't Do Fires Anymore". He looked at the FDNY workload from 1950 - 2000. He pointed out that there is a general rise in firefighting work that is linked to the population, social-economic factors and the building stock.

    While the frequency of simultaneous massive multiple alarm fires has fallen off since the 1970's, the need for well-trained firefighters to rescue occupants and suppress fires remains the same at the first and second alarm level.

    Because these fires do not generate the same publicity as a fifth alarm fire, the fire department needs to publicize and document the value of available and fully-staffed fire crews. A Fire Engineeting video of Fredericks' presentation is out-of-print (ISBN 0-87814-809-4). Brother Fredericks was murdered at WTC.
    Last edited by MikeWard; 09-19-2006 at 08:59 PM.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,535

    Default

    Fires are decreasing nationally. The numbers don't lie.

    In 1996, there were a reported 1,975,000 total fires eported to NFRIS, 4,990 fire-caused deaths and 25,550 fire-related injuries.

    In 2005, there were a reported 1,602,000 total fires reported to NFRIS, 3,675 fire-caused deaths and 17,925 fire-related injuries.

    That's a decrease of 373,000 total fires reported to NFRIS nationally in 10 years.

    To take it a bit farther, in 1996 there was 578,500 structure fires reported to NFRIS.
    In 2005, that number was 511,000. That's a reduction of 67,500 NFRIS reported structure fires since 1996.

    Let's go even farther ...
    In 1987, there was a reported 757,500 NFRIS reported structure fires.
    Again in 2005, there were 511,000 NFRIS reported structure fires.
    That represents a drop of 246,500 structure fires reported to NFRIS nationally from 1987.

    Keep in mind that the number of departments reporting through NFRIS has increased from about 12,000 in 1987 to about 13,000 in 1996 up to about 16,000 in 2005 (mainly due to the requirement that to get grants you must report to NFRIS). This makes the decreases even more significant as fires have still decreased as the data base increased.

    Please continue to argue that fires have not dropped significantly .... the numbers don't lie and there is no way you can make you're case. Locally you may have seen increases due to demographic changes, but nationally that is not the case.

    Data Source: US Fire Adminstration current website National Fire Statistics and "Fire in the United States 1987-1996".
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 09-19-2006 at 11:10 PM. Reason: Added source for data

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    2,503

    Default

    We haven't had a fire here since 1956. The city council outlawed them because we don't wear bunker gear - and everyone knows you can't fight a fire if you are not wearing a big, bulky pair of pampers.
    Last edited by ChicagoFF; 09-19-2006 at 09:32 PM.
    I am a complacent liability to the fire service

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    First I posted this article to highlight the arson problem in NY.

    Second, do you know where many of those fires "Nationally" are down from?

    Large urban Departments that no longer are burning vacants, and other structures as often Detroit, Chicago, Boston, New York Baltimore, DC, Cincinati, St. Louis, LA, Kansas City, Philadelphia, Pitsburg...etc. (I'll even throw Gary, In in there to say that it isn't all large departments)

    In the late 1970s my department alone was doing about twice as many "structure fires" as compared to today. But when you compare to the mid 1960s or the 1950, 40s, 30s...we are doing much more in terms of fires. We are where we should be in terms of the normal progression and growth of fires with an increase in population.

    You had alone 1000s of old tenements and brownstones in my city that had litterally 100s of fires in them before they burned down or were torn down. They are either no longer there or are completely renovated and occupied again. Vacant lots don't burn.

    Along with many of those fires of years ago being small food on the stove runs...due to cultural changes and cooking technology, (prepared foods are now just thrown in a microwave) many fires that were inconsequential in years past and were technically structure fires and would have been considered in any statisical gathering at the time.

    Also even the vacants we have aren't torched because right now they are actually worth lots of money...many kids who were bored and would light sh*t buildings off for fun and excitement have video games now to keep them occupied so there are less fires for that reason as well.

    I know personally my former department was a large suburb of a major city and has seen a steady increase in the number of fires (even though we always had some dopey chiefs who actually believed that mantra that fires are down!). As the population grows...as infrastructure ages, as demographics change..fires do increase.

    FTM-PTB
    Last edited by FFFRED; 09-20-2006 at 08:11 AM.

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,535

    Default

    If the statistics indicate fires are up in NYC, I am not going to dispute that as
    you mentioned, there are several factors that can cause fires to rise short-term and long-term in an area. Changing population demographics, increased arson due to increases in crime or apprently in this case, arson for profit (redevelopment) and aging of the structures.

    I have seen this type of "economic" arson before .... and it has happened in a variety of communties for a variety of reasons. My only point is that arson for profit is usually a short-term issue in a community and either the business owners will start getting caught and it will cease to be an attractive option as the chances of being caught increase, or eventually the supply of buildings to burn will run out, which will bring fires back to the normal (decreased in most cases) numbers. And yes, as vacants burn they do leave vacant lots, which has decreased the number of arson fires in most large cities.

    And yes, fires are increasing in places where the population is increasing, which in most cases are the suburbs and rural areas as folks move out of the cities. But even in those places, fires are increasing at a slower rate when compared to the increase in population compared to to 10 or 20 years ago. New technology has also played a part in reducing the fire rate in newer communties, as the newer residental construction is often required to have smoke detectors which provide early warning, and thereby eliminating or reducing the number of situations that would have become a fire response. Newer apartment buildings in newer communties are often required to have alarm systems, and newer commercial development is often required to have alarms and sprinkler systems. Codes in newer communties are more modern, making the structures more resistant to fire. Again, all this has significantly decreased the rate of the fire increase that would have been expected years ago in those newer communties. So even with the shift in population, fires are still decreasing. As older construction is renovated, or torn down and replaced with newer construction, utilizing modern firesafety technology, fires will decrease even furthur. The bottom line, fires will continue to decrease in all communties as we become better at prevebnting them.

    The point of my post was simplyt to point out the statistical data that fires are in fact decreasing, and the fire department needs to be aware that those decreases will make it more difficult to justify current supression staffing. It's something we need to be aware of. The numbers don't lie.

  11. #11
    Forum Member Chauffeur6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Metro NY
    Posts
    613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator
    The numbers don't lie.
    Well, see, the thing is...they kinda DO actually.

    Keep in mind how many times the coding for those NFIRS reports has changed, not just nationwide but statewide. There was a lot of latitude prior to Version 5, not much consistency at all. In NYS alone we had our own version for many, many years, in which a simple food on the stove was generally coded as a structural fire, even if it was confined to the cookware and did not extend. Now, with Version 5 only recently being more or less being a nationwide standard, that would go as a code 113. So, if you were to look at structural fires in NYS from a few years ago, with ALL those food on the stoves bunched in there...and you look at structural fires today in NYS, but exclude code 113, guess what? Yup, the numbers go WAY down for "structural fires". Which would lead some statisticians to deduce "Structural fires are down significantly from just 10 years ago."

    Let's not even get into the question of how many depts are either not reporting at all, or just really have no idea how to fill these things out. And let's toss laziness in there as well. If you have a choice between one code that you have to fill out 3 more sections for...or one that take 2 minutes to complete the form...and you have a hot date in 10 minutes (assuming of course you're a vollie)...which do you think a lazy guy is going to pick? Bad data in = bad data out. I've worked with the NFIRS system for enough years to know that much.

  12. #12
    Forum Member TCFire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Lockport, New York
    Posts
    417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chauffer6
    Well, see, the thing is...they kinda DO actually.

    Keep in mind how many times the coding for those NFIRS reports has changed, not just nationwide but statewide. There was a lot of latitude prior to Version 5, not much consistency at all. In NYS alone we had our own version for many, many years, in which a simple food on the stove was generally coded as a structural fire, even if it was confined to the cookware and did not extend. Now, with Version 5 only recently being more or less being a nationwide standard, that would go as a code 113. So, if you were to look at structural fires in NYS from a few years ago, with ALL those food on the stoves bunched in there...and you look at structural fires today in NYS, but exclude code 113, guess what? Yup, the numbers go WAY down for "structural fires". Which would lead some statisticians to deduce "Structural fires are down significantly from just 10 years ago."

    Let's not even get into the question of how many depts are either not reporting at all, or just really have no idea how to fill these things out. And let's toss laziness in there as well. If you have a choice between one code that you have to fill out 3 more sections for...or one that take 2 minutes to complete the form...and you have a hot date in 10 minutes (assuming of course you're a vollie)...which do you think a lazy guy is going to pick? Bad data in = bad data out. I've worked with the NFIRS system for enough years to know that much.
    Bingo. Having also done years of NFIRS reporting I have to agree with this. It's started to improve, but there is still way too much interpretation involved in NFIRS reporting, especially when it comes to structural fire coding. I've always wondered whether the person(s) who developed the NFIRS report coding had any background in firefighting.
    In Arduis Fidelis
    Faithful in Adversity

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    134

    Default

    People often get so carried away with numbers that they do not see the problem, and often ignore the numbers that count.

    People here are arguing over fire numbers nationwide while ignoring the drastic decrease of fire marshalls.

    I do not buy numerical trends. Numbers are too easy to cook. Change a NFIRS code and fires drop! The governmental regulations are working!

    How about this one- the only crime that people talk about are those that qualify as violent and serious crimes that go reported to the FBI. Now, when you are robbed by a perp with a gun, is it armed robbery?? "Did you see the gun? So, realistically, this is more of a simple robbery." Maybe you even just gave your money away because he asked?! What a coincidence, now it does not have to be reported!

    There is an arson problem in Brooklyn. If there is arson, it is a problem- it is causing death, injury, and people are losing everything they have. ITS A PROBLEM, DON'T LET THE NUMBERS CROSS YOU UP.

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orangehopeful
    People often get so carried away with numbers that they do not see the problem, and often ignore the numbers that count.

    People here are arguing over fire numbers nationwide while ignoring the drastic decrease of fire marshalls.

    I do not buy numerical trends. Numbers are too easy to cook. Change a NFIRS code and fires drop! The governmental regulations are working!

    How about this one- the only crime that people talk about are those that qualify as violent and serious crimes that go reported to the FBI. Now, when you are robbed by a perp with a gun, is it armed robbery?? "Did you see the gun? So, realistically, this is more of a simple robbery." Maybe you even just gave your money away because he asked?!

    There is an arson problem in Brooklyn. If there is arson, it is a problem- it is causing death, injury, and people are losing everything they have. ITS A PROBLEM, DON'T LET THE NUMBERS CROSS YOU UP.
    You must have learned from the Ray "Popey" Kelly school of lies and misdirection. That is exactly how the NYPD has reduced "crime" in many categories. Statistics lie and liars use statistics.

    FTM-PTB

  15. #15
    Forum Member nyckftbl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    On a Hill, overlooking George's Kingdom
    Posts
    2,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator
    If the statistics indicate fires are up in NYC, I am not going to dispute that as
    you mentioned, there are several factors that can cause fires to rise short-term and long-term in an area. Changing population demographics, increased arson due to increases in crime or apprently in this case, arson for profit (redevelopment) and aging of the structures.

    I have seen this type of "economic" arson before .... and it has happened in a variety of communties for a variety of reasons. My only point is that arson for profit is usually a short-term issue in a community and either the business owners will start getting caught and it will cease to be an attractive option as the chances of being caught increase, or eventually the supply of buildings to burn will run out, which will bring fires back to the normal (decreased in most cases) numbers. And yes, as vacants burn they do leave vacant lots, which has decreased the number of arson fires in most large cities.

    And yes, fires are increasing in places where the population is increasing, which in most cases are the suburbs and rural areas as folks move out of the cities. But even in those places, fires are increasing at a slower rate when compared to the increase in population compared to to 10 or 20 years ago. New technology has also played a part in reducing the fire rate in newer communties, as the newer residental construction is often required to have smoke detectors which provide early warning, and thereby eliminating or reducing the number of situations that would have become a fire response. Newer apartment buildings in newer communties are often required to have alarm systems, and newer commercial development is often required to have alarms and sprinkler systems. Codes in newer communties are more modern, making the structures more resistant to fire. Again, all this has significantly decreased the rate of the fire increase that would have been expected years ago in those newer communties. So even with the shift in population, fires are still decreasing. As older construction is renovated, or torn down and replaced with newer construction, utilizing modern firesafety technology, fires will decrease even furthur. The bottom line, fires will continue to decrease in all communties as we become better at prevebnting them.

    The point of my post was simplyt to point out the statistical data that fires are in fact decreasing, and the fire department needs to be aware that those decreases will make it more difficult to justify current supression staffing. It's something we need to be aware of. The numbers don't lie.

    Fires may be down, but personally, I think it has jack sh*t to do with smoke detectors, and commercial alarm systems, and has everything to do with the economic situation in the area. Comparing fire statistics now to the 60s or 70s, when NYC and other cities were in a huge economic hole, to the economic upshift we have seen since the early 90s, is ridiculous. And I guarantee that if the economy takes a dump again, the fire load will increase with it.

    What amazes me is that another thread has been flushed down the sh*tter because people like to argue about things not relevant to the thread. Fred posted an article about an arson epidemic in Brooklyn (there have been some fire bugs around in the BX and Harlem as well), and somehow it turned into fire stats from the last thirty years, and that we should be prepared to justify our fire staffing. How about this. we dont have enough staffing. Never have, and never will!
    Last edited by nyckftbl; 09-20-2006 at 06:50 PM.
    Proud East Coast Traditionalist.

  16. #16
    Forum Member VinnieB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    On the couch in my skivvies
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl
    Fires may be down, but personally, I think it has jack sh*t to do with smoke detectors, and commercial alarm systems, and has everything to do with the economic situation in the area. Comparing fire statistics now to the 60s or 70s, when NYC and other cities were in a huge economic hole, to the economic upshift we have seen since the early 90s, is ridiculous. And I guarantee that if the economy takes a dump again, the fire load will increase with it.

    What amazes me is that another thread has been flushed down the sh*tter because people like to argue about things not relevant to the thread. Fred posted an article about an arson epidemic in Brooklyn (there have been some fire bugs around in the BX and Harlem as well), and somehow it turned into fire stats from the last thirty years, and that we should be prepared to justify our fire staffing. How about this. we dont have enough staffing. Never have, and never will!
    NYC....this is what happens when people have to much time on thier hands. I know what we do...you know what we do...FFRED knows what we do...we all hear the dispatcher announcing multiples....plus whats posted on the rant in the all hands section. Just remember they are outsiders.....leave it at that.
    IACOJ Member

  17. #17
    Forum Member nyckftbl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    On a Hill, overlooking George's Kingdom
    Posts
    2,572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VinnieB
    NYC....this is what happens when people have to much time on thier hands. I know what we do...you know what we do...FFRED knows what we do...we all hear the dispatcher announcing multiples....plus whats posted on the rant in the all hands section. Just remember they are outsiders.....leave it at that.

    Rant? What rant?
    Proud East Coast Traditionalist.

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber JHR1985's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    1,917

    Default

    Fires may be down compared to yesteryear but the workload isnt lighter. Large departments, such as NYC, Chitown, Detroit especially, Dallas, hell, LAFD are still burning crap down. Building codes have improved a lot but new building materials are going downhill to match the improvements that are being made. They will peak off soon.

    While so called structure fires are down.... look at the huge amount of Brush Fires out there.... and the vast amount that they burn up.

    The close proxiemty to each other in northern states allows for faster fire spread than down south. Up North has a lot cooler winter, so heaters and such are going on all the time, thus causing fires.

    Down south, the summers are dreadful so drought causes huge brush fires. And hippies out west cause brush fires.

    For most, the days of getting 2-3 fires in a shift, such as Dennis Smith reports in Engine Co. 82 are rare except in the cities and such that I listed.

    A lot of deparments have seen a decrease in fire but a decrease in staffing also. A town near us, has doubled in size from 150,000 to over 300,000 in the last 20 years, but staffing wise, they are smaller now than twenty years ago and they have doubled. Thats sad.

    But, with the population increasing, fires will never go away. Some may get more than others. But, if your town is increasing in size, shoddy construction will eventually bring some. And if your town is rapidly decreasing, vacant buildings have a tendancy to burn.... ask our Detriot and NYC brothers. And if your town isnt doing anything... well, your screwed

    Someone on here a while back brought out a good point in a different topic. All the buildings that are burning down.... arson is soooo much cheaper than a demolition company
    Last edited by JHR1985; 09-20-2006 at 11:18 PM.

  19. #19
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,854

    Default

    FFFred...

    Of all the people on this forum please tell me who knows more about the FDNY fires than the guys from the FDNY? For the life of me I can't understand why you guys that are there have to explain how NATIONAL statistics are just that, NATIONAL averages, and the fact that parts of New York City are seeing a resurgance in arson fires simply can't be true because statistics say it is impossible.

    It is entirely possibe for the national statistics to show less fires and local staistics to show an increase in fires. Both through erroneous national reporting OR through peaks and valleys in actual fires in specific locations.

    Statistics are funny though. Gas here is now 82 cents a gallon less than it was a month ago. So statistically am I paying more or less? Well one set of statistics says less than a month ago, and another says still almost a dollar more per gallon than I was a year ago. Hmmmm, which one is right?

    FyredUp

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default



    Ya know, if the first hydrant we took had been good we'da held this one.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 02-24-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-27-2005, 02:40 PM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 12-20-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-31-2004, 09:39 PM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 02-18-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2004, 11:56 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 01-17-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-18-2004, 12:47 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 08-15-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2003, 01:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts