600 West 161st Street in Manhattan. Image credit: CityLaw.

Building Owner added apartments and lacked new certificate of occupancy. GVS Properties LLC owned a 10-story residential building at 600 West 161st Street in Manhattan. In 1970, GVS Properties received a certificate of occupancy that permitted 53 apartments in the building. In 2014 GVS Properties applied for a certificate of occupancy to validate alterations to the building which had increased the number of apartments to 60. Buildings refused to grant the certificate of occupancy because the apartments did not have two exits in case of a fire. Subsequently, nineteen tenants in the building refused to pay rent, asserting that the building did not have a valid certificate of occupancy.  GVS Properties sued the tenants for the rent. (read more…)

Owner had built non-conforming roofed terrace in one side yard and a roofed side-entrance porch in the other. Buildings approved plans for the construction of a residential building at 74 Amherst Street in Brooklyn. The approved plans showed a roofed terrace on the south side yard of the home and a roofed side-entrance porch on the north side. The home was built in 2004, Buildings inspectors signed off on the final construction, and the owner was issued a certificate of occupancy in 2005 which stated that the new building substantially conformed to the approved plans.

In 2009, an officer from Buildings saw the two side yard structures and issued the owner a notice of violation for having side yards not in conformity with the zoning resolution. An ALJ sustained the NOV after a hearing, finding that the porches were not in conformity with the zoning resolution and that Buildings’ approval of the work could not supersede the zoning resolution. The owner appealed to the Environmental Control Board, arguing that Buildings would not have issued the C of O if the final inspection had revealed zoning resolution violations.

The Board reversed the ALJ’s decision, ruling that the owner could rely on the C of O as proof that the building complied with all applicable laws. The Board explained that the C of O was binding on all agencies until set aside by the Board of Standards and Appeals or a court of competent jurisdiction.

NYC v. Marina Margulis, ECB Appeal No. 1000136 (June 24, 2010).

625-space garage had been operating over capacity since approximately 2003. On July 1, 2009, the City Planning Commission approved 111 Eighth Avenue Parking LLC’s application for a special permit allowing it to continue to operate a 625-space garage on the ground floor and cellar of an office building located between West 15th and 16th Streets, and Eighth and Ninth Avenues in Chelsea. The applicant began operating the 126,677 sq.ft. garage in 1999. It reached its current 625-space capacity a few years later, exceeding the 276 spaces permitted by the building’s Certificate of Occupancy.

At the Commission’s hearing, a representative for the garage apologized for its delay in rectifying the overcapacity, claiming that it had been unfamiliar with the application process for a special permit. Another representative stated that the garage had been consulting with the community and, based on community input, agreed to provide bicycle parking and storage at the garage. (read more…)