81-08-A APPLICANT – Harvey Epstein, Esq., for 514-516 East 5th Street, LLC, owner. SUBJECT – Application April 4, 2008 – Appeal seeking to revoke permit and approvals for a vertical enlargement of an existing non- fireproof tenement building which fails to comply with the applicable provisions of the MDL regarding fire safety standards. R7-2 zoning district. 6th PREMISES AFFECTED – 514-516 East Street, between A and Avenue B, Block 401, Lot 17, 18 & 56, Borough of Manhattan. COMMUNITY BOARD #3M APPEARANCES – For Applicant: Harvey Epstein. ACTION OF THE BOARD – Appeals granted. THE VOTE TO GRANT – Affirmative: Chair Srinivasan, Vice-Chair Collins, Commissioner Ottley-Brown, Commissioner Hinkson and Commissioner Montanez........................................4 Negative:......................................................................0 Absent: Commissioner Montanez.................................1 THE RESOLUTION:1 WHEREAS, the instant appeal comes before the Board in response to a determination of the Manhattan Borough Commissioner, dated March 6, 2008, to uphold the approval of Alteration Permit No. 104744877 permitting the enlargement of a five-story non-fireproof tenement building; and WHEREAS, the Final Determination reads, in pertinent part: “[t]he Department has determined that the applicant’s proposed design upgrades the level of fire protection afforded the occupants that is at least equivalent to what would be required under the MDL. For instance, the design includes the installation of a sprinkler system throughout the building, even though the MDL would not require any sprinklers. Additionally, the Department will require hard-wired smoke detectors in all apartments in the building to replace any battery operated ones, even though there would otherwise be no obligation to do so. Further, many other upgrades that increase the level of safety, such as increasing the fire- resistive rating of the stair and entrance hall walls and the cellar ceilings by adding layers of fire-rated sheetrock, and the construction of fire passages from the back yards. Thus, the fire-safety upgrades in the proposed design maintain the spirit and intent of the MDL, given the practical difficulties and unneccesary hardships that would be caused in this particular case by the compliance with the strict letter of the MDL provisions. Headings are utilized only in the interests of clarity 1 and organization. 81-08-A and the “subject buildings”); and PROCEDURAL HISTORY WHEREAS, the instant appeal concerns the enlargement of the Buildings; and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2007, DOB issued Alteration Permit No. 104744877 (the “Permit”) permitting a two-story vertical enlargement of the Buildings; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2007 and November 5, 2007, counsel for the appellant wrote the Manhattan Borough Commissioner requesting reconsideration of DOB’s approval of the Permit based on the alleged violation of the Multiple Dwelling Law; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2008, the Manhattan Borough Commissioner issued the Final Determination, cited above, that forms the basis of the instant appeal; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 2008, the appellant filed the instant appeal at the BSA; and ISSUES PRESENTED WHEREAS, the appellant makes the following primary arguments in support of its position that DOB should revoke the Permit for the subject buildings: (i) the Multiple Dwelling Law expressly prohibits enlargement of non-fireproof tenement buildings unless they are brought up to all applicable code requirements governing new construction; (ii) DOB lacked authorization to permit alternative safety upgrades in lieu of meeting requirements of the Multiple Dwelling Law; and WHEREAS, these two arguments are addressed below; and Requirements of Enlargement of Tenement Buildings WHEREAS, the appellant contends the enlargement of the Buildings violates the fire protection measures of the Multiple Dwelling Law and therefore that the Permit should be revoked; and WHEREAS, the appe

… (truncated, full text in PDF)