Location of air conditioning units was legal because units were located outside the required rear yard. Buildings issued a notice of violation to the owner of 1027 East 2nd Street in Brooklyn for maintaining an obstruction in a required rear yard. An officer issued the NOV after observing four air conditioning units in the rear yard within four inches of the side-lot line. Properties in residential districts are only permitted to install AC units in a required backyard if they are located at least eight feet from any lot line.

At a hearing, the owner stated that the property was located in the Ocean Parkway Special District, which requires a minimum backyard depth of twenty feet from the rear-lot line instead of the thirty-foot backyard required by the area’s underlying R3-1 zoning regulations. The owner argued that while his property had a thirty-foot rear yard, the AC units were located in a ten-foot portion of the yard closest to his home and not in the twenty-foot portion of the required yard under the special district’s regulations. An ALJ upheld the NOV, finding the special district’s rules did not redefine the requirements of other zoning regulations and were not meant to affect the rear yard regulations. (more…)

Board reverses ALJ, finds that lot was vacant when owner purchased property. 1115 Ocean Parkway LLC purchased a vacant lot in the Midwood section of Brooklyn and constructed a five-story building. An officer issued a Notice of Violation after he observed that a building had been demolished without a permit prior to the new construction. At a hearing, the owner claimed that the lot was vacant when it purchased the property, and submitted a recorded deed and accompanying survey that showed a vacant lot. The ALJ upheld the NOV, determining that the owner’s evidence was not convincing especially since the deed referenced the owner’s lot through a handwritten note and the survey contained no lot number.

The owner appealed to ECB, arguing that the recorded deed and survey proved the lot was vacant when the owner purchased the property. The Board agreed with the owner, reversed the ALJ’s decision and order, and dismissed the NOV. The Board ruled that the lot was vacant at the time of purchase, noting that the deed was recorded under the block and lot identified in the NOV and that the lot line boundaries on the survey matched the metes and bounds description of the lot on the recorded deed. (more…)