Permissible uses for vacant two-story building on Crosby Street expanded to include restaurant and bar. The owner of a vacant two-story building at 54 Crosby Street in SoHo applied to BSA for a use variance to permit a bar or restaurant on the building’s ground floor. The 4,535 sq.ft. building sits on a lot twenty feet wide and is built to less than half of the available floor area. The building was formerly used as a sculptor’s residence and studio, and its M1-5B manufacturing zoning does not permit commercial uses below the second floor.
The owner argued that the narrow building made a conforming manufacturing use impractical. The owner claimed that the building’s narrow floor plates were inefficient for a warehouse use and that the absence of an elevator would make transferring goods between floors difficult. According to an analysis submitted by the owner, only five of the 150 surrounding lots had widths of less than 25 feet and are built to less than half of the zoning district’s maximum floor area. (more…)

- Map of Proposed SoHo bid. Image: Courtesy of sohobid.org
Proposal encompasses 800 businesses and features unique reimbursement plan for certain mixed-use co-ops. On January 26, 2011, the City Planning Commission approved the Department of Small Business Services’ plan to create the SoHo Business Improvement District for approximately 800 businesses and 433 residential units in Manhattan. The BID would include 280 tax lots along Broadway between Houston Street and Canal Street. The BID would include a special reimbursement plan for seven mixed-use co-ops in response to concerns about the annual assessment on those properties.
The BID’s boundaries encompass a mix of uses including art galleries and retail shops. The area is primarily characterized by five- to twelve-story residential loft buildings with ground floor commercial uses and live-work quarters for artists on the upper floors. The BID’s projected first-year budget would be $700,000. Wholly commercial properties and ground floor commercial condominiums would be assessed based on a combination of a linear front footage rate, an assessed value rate, and a base fee of $250. Mixed-use properties, including co-ops, would be assessed the same way in which commercial properties are assessed, but using a reduced assessed value rate to reflect the upper floor residential use. Commercial condos located on an upper floor or below-grade space would be assessed based on an assessed value rate plus a base fee of $250. Wholly residential tax lots would pay an annual one-dollar assessment. (more…)
Community group argued developer improperly deducted elevator shafts on mechanical floor from floor area calculations. In May 2007, Buildings issued a building permit to the BayRock/Sapir Organization LLC to build a 42-story condominium hotel, known as Trump SoHo, at 246 Spring Street in Manhattan. The lot’s M1-6 zoning prohibited residential development. Therefore, Buildings’ approval required that the developer file a restrictive declaration prohibiting anyone from living in any of the building’s units for more than 29 consecutive days in any 36-day period or for a total of more than 120 days in a calendar year. Later that year, the SoHo Alliance community group unsuccessfully appealed the issuance of the permit, claiming that the building would violate the zoning resolution’s regulations for transient hotels. 5 CityLand 74 (June 15, 2008).
In August 2008, Buildings approved the developer’s plan to add a 43rd and 44th floor to the building. The Alliance challenged Buildings’ issuance of the permit, arguing that the project exceeded the maximum floor-area regulations. Buildings refused to revoke the permit, and the Alliance appealed to BSA. (more…)
New H&M storefront retains more of building’s original fabric than previous proposal. On September 7, 2010, Landmarks approved a revised proposal to replace the storefront of an 1860s-era building owned by H&M at 558 Broadway in the SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District. Landmarks had previously rejected a proposal to replace the two-story building’s entire brick facade with layered panels of fiberglass-reinforced concrete. 7 CityLand 76 (June 15, 2010). H&M’s new proposal would only impact the ground floor, leaving the building’s decorative work and a large second floor tripartite window untouched. TEK Architects’ David Lee proposed removing the ground floor facade, which had been repeatedly altered over the years, and building a glass storefront with grey steel framing and a sixteen-inch- high kick plate running along the bottom. An entrance to H&M’s second-floor showroom would be located on the left side of the facade and separated from the main storefront by a steel column.
Manhattan Community Board 2’s Jane McCarthy testified that CB2 supported the new plan. The Historic District Council’s Nadezhda Williams urged Landmarks to deny the proposal, conceding that it was “not nearly as offensive” as the initial plan but arguing it created a facade of two distinct and unrelated parts. (more…)
Architect argued that retail building’s deteriorating facade did not reflect area’s historic fabric. On May 4, 2010, Landmarks denied a proposal to construct a new facade for an H&M clothing store at 558 Broadway in the SoHo-Cast Iron Historic District. The site was originally occupied by a four-story building dating back to the 1860s, but the building’s height was reduced by two stories and the facade was reconstructed in 1920. H&M has been located in the building for ten years, but it only recently came into possession of the entire building. H&M proposed removing the existing brick facade in order to update the building with a more contemporary facade.
TEK Architects’ Andrew Ojamaa presented the plan, noting that H&M planned to renovate the building’s interior in addition to making the exterior alterations. The building’s first floor and cellar would continue to be used as a retail store, and H&M would use the second story as a private “editor’s showroom.” Ojamaa claimed the existing facade was in a state of disrepair and argued that the facade’s 1920s design did not reflect the neighborhood’s “designated historic fabric.” (more…)