Group Rallies to Oppose Planned First Ave. Homeless Shelter

Activists opposing the planned opening of a women’s homeless shelter on First Ave. held a rally before a Community Board 8 meeting on March 18, a few days after a judge issued a temporary restraining order on the project. That suit was sought by the board of a nearby luxury condo building.

The group that huddled outside Marymount Manhattan College on E. 71st St. that evening, which is calling itself the East Side Accountability Alliance, is separate from the condominium board plaintiffs. They appear to share similar objectives, however, and are set to file an additional lawsuit of their own against the city’s Department of Homeless Services (DHS).

The condo board of Bridge Tower Place at 401 East 60th St. is alleging that the 200-bed shelter will have “adverse noise impacts.” Meanwhile, the East Side Accountability Alliance is set on challenging DHS over rules in the city charter that mandate a “fair and equitable” spread of shelters across neighborhoods, according to lead attorney Howard Rubin.

The DHS says that such a clause is instrumental to placing the 200-bed women’s shelter on First Ave., given the dearth of other shelters in Council Speaker Julie Menin’s district on the Upper East Side.

At the March 18 rally, Rubin said that the planned legal action was “not a case of local residents not looking to take their fair burden to help those who need help, this is a case of them being asked to take more than their fair share.” He later specified that he believed existing shelters on E. 89th St. and E. 91st St. were sufficient.

Todd “TJ” Stein, a CB8 member, spoke in his personal capacity to oppose the shelter. He said he personally believed that the shelter placing residents in a dormitory-style congregate living space would be “inhumane,” pointing out that some homeless people avoid living in such shelters, which can offer less privacy.

Alina Bonsell, a Republican State Senate candidate, said that she believed the proposed shelter had not received sufficient “community input.” She added that she thought spending taxpayer money on such shelters was “wasteful,” indicating that she also opposed congregate shelter models.

At the Community Board 8 meeting proper, Board Chair Valerie Mason said that the advisory body she leads has little control over the shelter process, whether people support it or not. She made extended remarks in response to Bonsell, who stepped up to a podium at the beginning of the meeting to reiterate her opposition.

“If you want to have a shelter in your building, you are within your rights to send the application for your property [to] DHS. Then, technically, your site is under consideration. That is the process,” Mason said.

“The community board only has a specific involvement in the Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) process, which are changes in land variances and zoning,” she added. “I understand that people in this room tonight are upset about the process. The process has been the same, as I understand it, for years.”

Mason then noted that other members of the community were “overwhelmingly” supportive of the shelter. “The attendance in this room tonight is partisan against the shelter,” she said. “Many people did contact the board and say they were in favor of the shelter.”