161-11-A APPLICANT – Amelia Arcamone-Makinano, Britton Property, Inc., owner; Yung Cheng President, lessee. SUBJECT – Application August 13, 2018 for a Reargument and Rehearing pursuant and 1-12.5 of the Board’s Rules of Practice Procedure. PREMISES AFFECTED – 82-20 Britton Block 1517, Lot 3, Borough of Queens. COMMUNITY BOARD #4Q Request ACTION OF THE BOARD – argument denied. THE VOTE TO GRANT – Affirmative: ..................................................................0 Negative: Chair Perlmutter, Vice-Chair Commissioner Ottley-Brown, Commissioner Commissioner Scibetta..................................................5 THE RESOLUTION – WHEREAS, this is an application for the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure requests for reargument and rehearing of previously granted by the Board; and WHEREAS, this application has been adjacent property owner at 82-22 Britton Queens (Block 1517, Lot 5); and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held application on March 26, 2019, after due publication in The City Record, and then to the same date; and WHEREAS, Vice-Chair Chanda performed inspection of the site and surrounding neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located side of Britton Avenue, between Broadway Street, in an R7B zoning district, in Queens; WHEREAS, the subject site has approximately feet of frontage along Britton Avenue, depth, 2,500 square feet of lot area and is occupied six-story, with cellar, mixed-use community-facility residential building; and WHEREAS, the adjacent site located Britton Avenue, Queens (Block 1517, immediately north of the subject site; and WHEREAS, the Board has exercised over the subject site since May 4, 2012, when, the subject calendar number, the Board appeal to the extent of reversing the permit and stop work order issued by the Department Buildings (“DOB”) that were based on an question of owner’s authorization; however, did not direct DOB to eliminate its objections issue a certificate of occupancy; and WHEREAS, in Arcamone-Makinano City Dep't of Bldgs., No. 14007/12 (April 8, Supreme Court of the State of New York held adjacent property owner failed to “file a complaint the DOB with respect to any of the Certificates of Occupancy, and thus failed their administrative remedies,” and that the property owner was “untimely” in challenging Board’s determination of the subject appeal; WHEREAS, DOB issued a certificate occupancy for the subject building on March and 161-11-A was completed in accordance with all applicable and WHEREAS, the property owner states issues presented by the adjacent property owner application have been fully considered and private litigation; and WHEREAS, the property owner states Board should not grant reargument under 12.4 of the Board’s Rules because the Board misapprehend any facts or misapply principles; and WHEREAS, the property owner states Board should not grant rehearing under Section of the Board’s Rules because, rather “denied, dismissed, or withdrawn with prejudice,” subject appeal was granted; and WHEREAS, the property owner further waiver of the Board’s Rules of Practice and would not be appropriate because the adjacent owner fails to allege any basis for such a waiver; WHEREAS, the property owner notes adjacent property owner presents no new this application because every fact relevant subject appeal was readily available for presentation hearing during the pendency of the subject WHEREAS, accordingly, the property submits that this application should be denied; DOB’S POSITION WHEREAS, DOB states that it takes on this application; and WHEREAS, DOB states that, if reopens the subject appeal and finds the permits issued in error and subject to revocation, certificate of occupancy for the subject building also issued pursuant to said permits; and WHEREAS, DOB has not filed an with the Board for revocation of the certificate occupancy for the subject building; and DISCUSSION WHEREAS, at the outset, the Board since a certificate of occupancy has been iss

… (truncated, full text in PDF)