Department of Buildings Commissioner Chandler. Image credit: NYCC/William Alatriste

Licensed PE made multiple false and negligent filings with Buildings. The Department of Building brought an administrative proceeding against Scott Schnall, a licensed professional engineer, alleging that he knowingly or negligently made false statements in eleven alteration applications filed with Buildings between 2010 and 2014. Six of applications were in violation of the Zoning Resolution, the Multiple Dwelling Law, or the Administrative Code. The alteration applications filed related to six properties in Brooklyn. (read more…)

The New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (“LPC”) has designated more than 1,400 individual landmarks and 107 historic districts.  Approximately 29,000 buildings are under LPC regulation. With only five percent of that total comprising individual landmarks,95 percent are subject to LPC regulation solely because they are located within historic districts, regardless of individual merit.

With the proliferation of buildings subject to LPC regulation, both as individual landmarks and within historic districts, attention has increasingly focused on the landmark process. On May 2, 2012, the City Council’s Housing and Buildings Committee and Land Use Committee, chaired by Erik Martin Dilan and Leroy G. Comrie, Jr., respectively, held a joint public hearing to consider eleven separate bills.

(read more…)

Buildings cited 1974 building plan but could not produce it. Buildings issued a notice of violation to the owner of a building for engaging in work that did not conform to an approved building plan. Buildings stated that the owner extended the building beyond the size specified in a 1974 plan. At a hearing, Buildings stated that it could not locate the 1974 plan and relied instead on a copy of a 1959 plan and photographs that showed an extension to the building. The owner submitted a copy of a 1977 Certificate of Occupancy referencing the 1974 plan that certified the building substantially conformed to the plan. He also submitted a copy of a Buildings inspector’s approval of an architect’s 1974 certification attesting to the accuracy of a plot diagram and other work related to the building’s extension. The ALJ upheld the violation, ruling that the owner’s documents did not permit the extension.

The owner appealed, claiming that he could not be in violation of the Administrative Code for failing to conform to the 1974 plan if Buildings could not produce that plan and that the 1977 C of O proved that the building did conform to the 1974 plan. (read more…)