Hundred Saved From Grain Explosion
By Immediate Eviction in Brooklyn;
Temperature Was Well Below Freezing.
Wheat Waited Quietly for Four Years
But Could Have Blown Up Any Time.
By Henry J. Stern
January 24, 2008
NOTE: To post a comment on this item visit our blog.
On Sunday in below-freezing weather, over one hundred residents of 475 Kent Avenue, an 11-story commercial building in Williamsburg, were evicted by order of the Fire Commissioner on two hours' notice.
The Fire Department issued the vacate order, effective immediately, because they discovered two silos containing wheat and rats in the basement of the building. The wheat was used for baking shmura matzos. The Fire Department feared that it would explode, although there was no evidence that it was about to do so. In a New York Post column titled "Matzo Bawl at Building," FDNY Deputy Chief Joe Woznica described the situation by saying, "Residents were living with two large bombs in the basement."
The Buildings Department had not given permission for the storage of wheat in the basement. No plans were on file for the silos or the coal-fired oven that was used to bake the matzos. We are told that rats abounded in the building, attracted by the availability of ample amounts of appetizing wheat.
The Office of Emergency Management responded to the situation promptly, providing buses to take the evictees to shelters. OEM assisted the tenants in finding places to stay. The majority were able to find shelter with relatives or friends.
The city agencies performed their duties well. But something was wrong. The offending wheat had been in the basement for four years. The possibility of its exploding the night of January 20 was minimal. But fire officers, aware of the Deutsche Bank tragedy where two firefighters died, the failure of their agency to inspect that building for years, and the obloquy received by the chiefs held responsible, decided to issue an immediate vacate order.
In addition, the building had no certificate of occupancy for residential use, so some of the residents were theoretically commercial tenants, photographers or other artists. Rents for the loft studios are said to have ranged up to $3000 a month, so this was no flophouse, although there were numerous code violations, as there are in many older buildings.
At first people believed that the landlord might have caused the eviction, since getting rid of all his tenants would make the building more valuable, as it could be more easily converted into luxury condos. The owner was initially uncooperative with city officials, until it was apparently explained to him that it would be in his interest to act like a victim, not a criminal. City officials now think that he was a victim, since the revenue from his illegal tenants would be more than he would willingly surrender.
The Fire Department said they originally went to the building because a piece of cornice had fallen from the roof. No one was injured, but the building received an inspection. When the fire inspector found the wheat, they recalled that silos in the midwest occasionally had explosions, although it could be more likely that an employee would fall into the wheat and drown, as if he were in quicksand. In this case, the silos were much smaller than in the midwest (they had to fit in the basement) so drowning was unlikely.
Assuming the wheat was a possible hazard, it would seem logical to remove it from the basement. Reportedly, the tenants offered to do that on the spot. That could have allowed the 100 plus tenants to remain in the building, while the other violations were removed over the next few months. The Fire Department could remove the wheat itself and bill the landlord, or order the landlord to do it immediately. The work should be done under the supervision of experts in hazardous materials, who work both for Fire and the Office of Emergency Management.
As the vacate order moved up the chain of command, like Private Slovik's death sentence, no one challenged it. No officer wanted to be held responsible in case anything happened in the building. The issue came to fire chief who had city-wide responsibility, but apparently did not want to over-rule the local chiefs, or make a decision which was less rigorous than the men in the field recommended. We have no idea whether any civilians at the top of the agency were consulted about the mass eviction, although the decree came in the form of an order from the Fire Commissioner. (You can find it on the blog of the Gowanus Lounge). So far as we know, no one has volunteered to take responsibility for the order.
The landlord is a man named Nachman Brach, whom the police might describe as a person known to the department. He is pictured here with partner and fellow landlord Abe Follman.
Rather than describe in detail his interactions with various city agencies with regard to other properties he owns in Brooklyn, we simply ask you to link here. You will find more information on his activities and holdings. This background may clarify, or obscure, his role at 475 Kent Avenue. Nachman Brach can be found easily on Google. Remember, you will only see the cases that were reported on the internet. There are undoubtedly others which did not attract public attention.
For those of you who want to know more about the chain of events Sunday evening, which becomes more fascinating the more you know about it, use this link to Gowanus Lounge, which is a blog where people write about what is going on in their neighborhoods, and particularly in their buildings. The hour by hour accounts of what was happening at 475 Kent provide an example of the mixture of new technology and old bureaucracy.
As far as we know, no one committed a violent crime here. There is no accusation of bribery or arson (in fact, there was no fire). The issue we see is judgment, at what level in an agency decisions of this nature should be made, and what information should be provided to the people who make those decisions. No one was killed or injured, which is fortunate.
Will Mr. Brach be able to enter 475 Kent Avenue to recover his wheat, or that part of it which was not eaten or soiled by rats? Will he find another place to store it that will be compliant with the law? Will the building be repaired, and the violations removed? Or will it be sold to a developer for the construction of luxury condos?
Time will tell, and we will watch.
#441 01.24.2008 1066wds
|