By Gus Saltonstall
The city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) approved — without modifications — Gate 211 Architecture’s proposed building modifications to 160 West 74th Street, the former Calhoun School property that is slated to open as a women’s homeless shelter in the fall.
The LPC’s approval without modifications means the developer, Bayrock Capital, along with the architecture firm, will not have to again appear in a public hearing with the city before opening, unless new building-design changes are added.
With the approval granted from the city, the next step in the process is for the developer to submit construction drawings, before receiving a certificate of appropriateness, and then filing construction permits with the Department of Buildings.
At that point, construction at 160 West 74th Street could begin.
Members of the LPC noted that the proposed design changes for the Upper West Side building were all “fairly common,” and did not conflict with previously set standards.
Multiple Upper West Siders spoke during the 35-minute conversation about the proposal, all of whom voiced some form of displeasure about the project.
“The developer does not have ties to the community…it is a building that was built for a school that is now going to be inhabited by 150 people all day,” one speaker said. The incoming West 74th Street shelter will hold 146 beds.
Members of the LPC, similar to members of Community Board 7 during their January meeting, were concerned specifically with the design changes to the West 74th Street building, reiterating that their focus and influence relate exclusively to modifications to the property.
“This commission can not regulate things like prior deals or the use of the building, which is why we focus on architectural change,” a commission member said.
There will be an additional Community Board 7 Health & Human Services Committee meeting in February that will center around the programatic side of the shelter. During that meeting, the community board will hold another vote or publish a resolution that will relate to whether it supports the shelter on that specific Upper West Side block.
Volunteers of America will be the nonprofit provider for the shelter.
There will be two security guards on duty at the front of the building, 65 security cameras across the facility, a 24-hour open phone line for the community to provide feedback or raise concerns, and a minimum of four security staff working at all times with an additional supervisor, the Department of Social Services told Patch.
The LPC also noted that Community Board 7 had recommended approval for the West 74th Street design changes.
You can see all of the approved design changes, including a platform chairlift at the front of the building, the creation of an additional story and roof, and the installation of new lights in the rear of the building — HERE.
Subscribe to WSR’s free email newsletter here.
Read More:
Welp… Another major project sailing through on the UWS without community involvement or consideration. Keep raising those taxes….
Let’s see: security guards, 65 security cameras, 4 security staff + supervisor at all times … spotlights on the roof … this is a neighborhood facility? If these security measures are designed to make us feel better, sure doesn’t work for me.
I want more lights, more guards and more police in the area because this is going to be a crime magnet like weed shops.
What measures would make you feel more comfortable?
What is really disingenuous is that the buyer said the property was for one use and then did a bait and switch.
They did the same thing on West 79
Sure, he’ll make more money this way.
Will they be subject to a curfew or can we expect them to be hanging out all night on the block?
Who are “they” again?
Good question.
I live on this block in a building two doors down and this is among the many things that worry me.
I wonder what the people in the Marbury and the brownstones on the back of 160 feel about this. And I cannot imagine the building at 160 housing 150 people at the same time. This is a small building, built as a school and used for the same, for years. Even adding a floor won’t make that much more space. Anyone think about congestion in living spaces, bathrooms, food services ? Eh? Nah — guess money was the sole object.
Unemployment rate is still really low. Will these people be encouraged to find a job. Or do something else in repayment for their free housing? How about picking up some trash? Or in some other small way be a contributing member of society? Rather than just hanging out?
There are also lots of jobs in less desirable places than NYC. But if you need a job to pay the bills and keep a roof over your head, sometimes you have to make compromises. And housing can be built a lot more cost effectively elsewhere.
This is not being mean. Or NIMBY. If I lost my job and needed to save money, I would also look elsewhere. I have done that before. As have most members of my family.
Can’t have such compromises in this city. Need the most expensive neighborhoods to house cost centers like this, at the highest possible cost to the taxpayer. And it needs to drag for as long as possible, with no incentive to any party to ever stop or solve it. Because…you know…”justice.”
This is awful. Interesting the LPC usually moves at a snail’s pace and generally does not approve any modifications, and this just sailed right through. Who was paid off? Yet another homeless shelter in family UWS.
This is an interesting point. I’ve never gotten an LPC hearing so quickly. My building’s window permit application took months to get an LPC hearing.
Amazing. Construction has begun and the block is often cordoned off. Any Upper West Side property owner is familiar with the horrible red tape it takes to get anything new built, or altered on the UWS whether it be permits, CBs, Buildings Departments, inspections, etc.
How the heck could this have all happened so quickly when the building was just sold with the initial intent stated as luxury housing?
So what are our options in terms of action?
The residents of 74th street continue to be very concerned about the proposed shelter. We have never been asked for input; we have no idea if attention has been paid to the ratio of square footage of the building to the number of people who will be occupying it 24/7, including professional and administrative staff, and security. We believe that what is motivating the high number of women being housed here is political and economic; the developer who owns the building is paid based on the number of beds. The street is narrow and is not designed for large food service trucks and other services double parked for long periods of time. While I personally have no issue with having a women’s shelter on the street, the design and number of people housed here should be consistent with the overall character of the neighborhood and the lifestyle of its residents. An overcrowded building that disrupts traffic and harms the tranquility of the street should not be permitted.
The food delivery truck typically come between 3-5 am, so they don’t cause to much traffic. They will just wake you up at that time like they do on my block West 63rd.
So sorry to all the neighbors. At least the one on 83rd street is more of a utility street.
The one on 83rd Street is across from an elementary school. More specifically, the playground designated for pre-k and K at the elementary school. Brilliant!
100% opposed to this plan.
This plan has not taken into consideration the effect on the very quiet residential nature of this block on 74th Street. No-one on the block was notified, and we only found out from the West Side Rag. The plan for 146 beds plus staff does in no way address the effect on the neighborhood in terms of overcrowding, traffic, garbage removal, health care, etc. The street is narrow and can barely handle double parked cars. I attended the meeting of the LPC. They were only interested in the architectural issues, particularly in the front of the building. Why not, as Gale Brewer suggested, create low income housing, or for sure reducing the number of residents to 40-50, not the 146 plus staff that will be housed in what will be an overcrowded building. This will massively lower real estate values and the quality of the neighborhood life. All the security measures they have suggested, instead of creating a sense of safety, have created a sense of serious alarm. They are obviously expecting some danger in housing that many folks on this very small street.
The UWS, sadly, has become a dumping ground for migrants, homeless, smoke shops…
Why are empty buildings on the UES NOT experiencing the same housing situations?
Cameras? Security Guards? Spotlights on the roof? Sounds like they’re already expecting it to be a problem.
When studio apartment rentals in the same neighborhood are going for over $4000 a month, I can’t imagine how neighbors must feel. I’m twenty blocks north and can see changes affecting our neighborhood. More store closings, more pot shops, it’s a shame what the UWS is turning into.
Only “empty” buildings on UES are those slated for demolition and or where developer is assembling lots for redevelopment.
Unlike UWS which fights and moans each time anyone wants to redevelop property they actually do build new things on UES.
When an owner cannot redevelop property to unlock its full economic potential they will simply find other ways to unlock value.
What happens when the developer decides nah….won’t make enough money from a shelter. It would not be unheard of.
Let me ask the assembled throngs. How much money must there be in shelters for a developer to change plans from luxury condos to a shelter?
Bayrock has entered into a contractual agreement with city (lease). As such shelter will exist for at least terms of that legal arrangement. When it expires who knows…
DSS and Volunteers of America have each called this a “temporary” shelter. Since neither city nor V of A own the building how long this shelter remains will be an open question.
If at time of expiration Bayrock raises rent for renewal, or finds it has other uses for property, the shelter will close.
That building is worth a fortune. What is our city paying him for this?
Value of land and improvements is limited due to landmark status.
If Bayrock could tear down this building and redevelop property that would be another matter. But since they cannot upside on value is limited to potential uses as building largely is now.
This really is outrageous. A small residential street being burdened with 150 homeless people plus a security apparatus to keep some kind of order? Why is our neighborhood constantly being overburdened with this kind of stuff?
What’s next?
Gee – maybe the City will close the street for “open streets”
From the Patch piece “ This high-quality transitional housing facility will provide women experiencing homelessness the critical opportunity to receive the quality care and supports they need to get back on their feet and ultimately transition to permanent housing,” I’m sure the neighbors on the block would like to hear or attend a presentation from the provider, and to hear from neighbors of their other Upper West Side facilities. I’m not on the block, just close -but I hope for the residents-to-be that they receive the services and support they need from attentive staff, find some community in the building, and have good experiences in the neighborhood as they strive to get their lives more on track. Be kind, people. These are folks in very tough situations who need support – as do we all.
The neighborhood experience we had when the Lucerne became a homeless shelter during Covid was that the Security Guards were also needed on the the streets around the shelter. But the Security Guards said all they could do was ask the homeless residents to “move along and not hang out”. They had no authority to intervene in any altercation, passing out from drugs, buying drugs on the street, etc. For those incidents, the neighbors were told to call 911. – which we did frequently.