Compound

1. »
   22 August 2010 · 07:16 PM ·

   The Hunt: in the Zone

   [by Allison. This may be a somewhat dry post, but I wanted to dive into some of the more technical aspects of real estate that we’re dealing with.]

   After agreeing to focus on Red Hook several weeks ago, the group has been scouring the neighborhood for buildings or lots for sale. Our strategy has been a little scattershot, but in casting a wide net we’re hoping that something will turn up.  

   In our research, we have realized that the zoning in Red Hook is going to severely limit where we can buy and/or build, more so than we originally thought.  The zones in Red Hook as determined by the Department of City Planning are as follows:
   

   •  R5, R6 (Residential)
   •  M1-1, M1-2, M2-1, M3-1, and MX-5 (Manufacturing)
   •  Commercial overlays C1-1 (mostly along Van Brunt St), C1-2 and C1-3 (on a few blocks of Lorraine)

   The Red Hook Houses occupies approx. 50% of all R5 and R6 property, so the supply of available residential zoned property is extremely limited. 

   

   [Zoning map 16a, from NYC Planning Commission]

   Red Hook is a somewhat unusual mix of residential and manufacturing zoning. The industrial nature of the waterfront often conflicts with the inland residential blocks and there is an ongoing struggle between business needs and housing needs.  Red Hook was once a bustling, working waterfront, however starting around the 1950‘s, the shipping industry died out and left many warehouses empty.  The abundance of these large industrial spaces is one of the factors that first attracted artists to the area in the early ’90’s. These large abandoned warehouses are also attractive to residential developers, but I believe there must be a balance between residential and manufacturing/commercial use in the neighborhood.  As the neighborhood grows, it will be very important to maintain a vibrant manufacturing base where local artisans, builders, fabricators and other businesses can thrive.

   I have seen many conversions and new developments in the neighborhood that appear to skirt around the zoning restrictions.  As an architect, I have a fairly clear understanding of zoning and code, and I wanted to know how they are getting built –was I missing something, a loophole?  So I spoke with one of my zoning and code consultants about the guidelines and intent of the different zoning categories we have in Red Hook.  

   In short, I was not missing anything. We cannot build a residence, even as a live/work arrangement, on a M zoned lot unless it specifically has a live/work overlay zone such as MX-5 (like around the Fairway building) . There is one exception: if a residential building pre-dates the zoning resolution and has a residential Certificate of Occupancy, it is considered a non-conforming use, but is allowed.  In this case we may continue using it as residential, but may not increase the level of non-compliance by adding additional residential square footage. 

   A “caretakers apartment” as part of an manufacturing development is a strategy that is sometimes used by owners or developers to create a live/work situation.  However, according to my code consultant (who worked for the DOB until recently and specializes in zoning and BSA appeals), this is not the intent of a caretakers apartment. The DOB is actively discouraging the incorrect use of a caretakers apartment and will reject applications which do not comply with the intent of the law.

   A zoning variance may be requested by applying the the BSA (Board of Standards and Appeals).  The variance process is defined by five specific findings that are listed in the Zoning Resolution. These findings state that there must be some uniqueness to the property that makes it impossible to generate a reasonable return under the current zoning.  The variance must also maintain the character of the community and must contemplate the minimum variable to afford relief.  A variance can take upwards of a year and can easily cost $50,000 in legal fees.  Some developers figure this in to the cost of the land, and even though there are several lots where I think we could easily get a variance, this is too time consuming and expensive for us.

   So, it looks like we are left with these options:

   • An existing residential building or lot in R5 or R6 
   • An existing building with a residential C of O in an M zone (non-compliant use can be retained)
   • A building or lot in the MX-5 zone

   This reduces our options, but also allows us to focus in on the properties that will work for us.

   Coming Soon: a property we may be interested in!

   
   

   The Hunt Zoning
Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus

free web hit counter

Back to Top