Roosevelt Island Fire Protection

wfd444

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
177
With many new structures in the works is it possible more would be in order for fire safety?

http://newyorkyimby.com/2016/06/cornell-techs-26-story-250-unit-passive-house-dorm-tops-out-on-roosevelt-island.html
 

fdny1075k

New member
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
5,083
Good question. The island currently has a population of over 11,000. Maybe bring back Engine 49?

Right now, QNS companies from the 45 Battalion are due to boxes on Roosevelt Island. I think R4 is also assigned on structural boxes on the island along with the standard 3 & 2.
 

68jk09

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
13,964
fdny1075k said:
Good question. The island currently has a population of over 11,000. Maybe bring back Engine 49?

Right now, QNS companies from the 45 Battalion are due to boxes on Roosevelt Island. I think R4 is also assigned on structural boxes on the island along with the standard 3 & 2.
When ENG*49 was in service the population on the Island was was lower but now w/the high density it would make sense to have a Unit/Units on the Island to respond.....the other problem is that if the Bridge to the Island get stuck when raised then the only way for Units to get there is by Boat & from Manhattan by Subway.....but does anybody in authority give a crap about that when they don't about the alarm Box system OOS since 9-16-10 ?
 

wfd444

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
177
prolly not
but I would suggest:
Ladder 8 to be moved to the isalnd
also engine 259
when and if anything would be considered
 

68jk09

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
13,964
I would rather see new Units organized on the Island.....there is money for many other city hall pet projects that have nothing to do w/lifesaving.
 

wfd444

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
177
but new wont happen..best will be transfer of existing units or redeployment
 

bigcheese

New member
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
12
I would bet that the majority of people on Roosevelt Island are not aware that they basically have no fire protection if the bridge gets stuck in the open position, which used to happen quite often. I would think they are under the false impression that since there is a firehouse on the island, there must be firefighting units (Engine & Ladder) inside the building, which is not true.

A 10-77 in one of those dwellings, with the bridge out of service, could be a disaster.
 

guitarman314

Active member
Joined
Mar 8, 2007
Messages
5,673
  I remember the original plan years ago was to move E260 into the Roosevelt Island firehouse, then move L116 to E260's firehouse and leave E261 at 29th St. They didn't do that and eventually wound up disbanding E261.
 

68jk09

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
13,964
bigcheese said:
I would bet that the majority of people on Roosevelt Island are not aware that they basically have no fire protection if the bridge gets stuck in the open position, which used to happen quite often. I would think they are under the false impression that since there is a firehouse on the island, there must be firefighting units (Engine & Ladder) inside the building, which is not true.

A 10-77 in one of those dwellings, with the bridge out of service, could be a disaster.
bigcheese you are 100% on the money.
 

wfd444

Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
177
they can still do the above plan without eng 261 by moving rescue 4 to 29th st
 

NYBravest82

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
427
Moving existing units out of their area would cause an uproar for one, but more importantly leave those areas unprotected. Adding units would help, but I doubt that'll happen with the budget. We need more units here on S.I. and we aren't even getting that. Hell we still don't have a Squad.

I think an option would be to move some of the SOC units to other locations, even the rock...the compressor unit, logistics van, dewatering unit, etc., keep the TAC there, move in and Engine and a Ladder. Maybe even an additional Marine Company on the Queens waterfront.

The whole situation reeks of typical city politics, build the fun stuff, forget the infrastructure, then have a calamity and realize, "oh crap, we shoulda put this there too..." after loss of property and life.
 

memory master

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
2,770
It's like the Chief said earlier, they (City Pols) don't care at all about the street boxes in Queens being OOS for five or 6 years, what makes you think they care about fire protection anywhere else. Does anyone remember back in the 1960's that there was a fire in Beechurst, Queens (near the Throgs Neck Bridge) in the LeHarve apartment complex. L144 had a 1953 FWD 75' aerial that didn't reach fire floor and there was a DOA involved. Miraculously, right after that 144 received a rig with a 100' stick. Something tragic has to occur before they will budge an inch.
 

turk132

Active member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
569
During the Dinkins administration E294 was closed and the following night 2 people died in their 1st due area. There was a list of companies that he wanted to close, I believe it was 20 to 40 companies. No companies were close after this tragedy.
 

68jk09

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
13,964
In Double Fatal Fire after the closing of 294 they tried to deflect the closing by saying that the another ENG did not use the correct hydrant hookup which was BS .....it was a Jamaica Water Supply hydrant w/only one 2 1/2" outlet & the hydrant was not visible from the direction the ENG approached but the MPO was familiar w/hooking up to it.....once this was hashed over they then asked all 3 ENGs what route they took to the box then took their route cards to see what route was suggested & started to pick the routes apart......this held no water so then they went to the tapes & made an issue over the fact the the ABC had given "AH working" before they all had arrived (rather than saying we will use AH on their arrival).....all BS issues....the 1st Due ENG (294) was closed & 2 civilians died.....the fault laid w/the City pain & simple.....294 was actually closed for a period twice in their time...years after the Fatal Fire when the City threatened FH closings in the mid '2000s they selected 293 instead of 294.....apples & oranges. 
 

nfd2004

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
6,280
I also remember this incident when two civilians died in a fire that the closed Eng 294 would have been First Due at.

Let me add that NYC is not alone. Sixty miles away in Bridgeport, Ct a fire occurred in a public housing project leaving two other occupants dead. Same story, the first due Engine Co had been closed only a few weeks earlier. The second due engine was out on another run in their first due area. It would take the THIRD DUE Engine Co to arrive at this fire before any water could be applied to attack it. By that time it was too late. Too many extra minutes had passed and for those innocent victims, just like those victims who might have survived had Eng 294 been there, "they apparently had no chance". The city then tried to use every excuse except the right one, on why those people died.

  We travel another 75 miles east of Bridgeport to a small city called Norwich, Ct. Where the plan of many city officials was to eliminate/lay off 16 firefighters of a 60 man department. That plan was to close down a Three man Engine Co (Eng 3) and drop a Fourth firefighter on one of the other single house Engine Cos. (Eng 2). This was in the planning stages as early as last January, 2015 for the July, 2016 budget. Word was out that if this should happen, those politicians  would be held accountable if anything were to go sour. When the fire department budget was passed just a week or so ago, it wasn't a total win for the people and it's fire department. That fourth member on Eng 2 will be lost but through attrition and not lay offs. And Engine 3 will remain open.

  There is now an upcoming newspaper article expected to show several documented cases of serious incidents where these firefighters were never used. Despite them being much closer than the other responding mutual aid companies. It seems there might have been a plan by some in the works of how this city could get along without all of those firefighters.

  This actually started back in January, 2015. It took a lot of convincing by many individuals to get the backing of the majority of the politicians to keep that Engine Co (3) open. It took a Chief of Department to present his many facts and details defending the need for this manning. It took a group of well trained, dedicated firefighters willing to serve the citizens and tell their story. And most important, it took a group of citizens who defended those firefighters that they all depend on.

  So whether it's the FDNY, or some big or small city in Connecticut, not everybody see's their firefighters in the way most of us do. As one of the strongest links in a chain holding a city together. Helping the people who are a part of it, whether it be where they live, work or visit. If we don't need them we should consider ourselves very lucky. But if we do need them, we need them to be there without delay.
 
Top