DOB filing B01410992-I1
Alteration filing at 5922 New Utrecht Avenue
Building record · BIN 3331022
5922 New Utrecht Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11219
A consolidated, filing-by-filing view of DOB records matched to this building identifier. The current snapshot links 1 independently sourced records, including 0 that are not recorded as completed, closed or withdrawn.
BUILDING RECORD · BIN 3331022
5922 New Utrecht Avenue
Borough Park, Brooklyn
A consolidated public-record view · updated Sep 17, 2026
A building-level summary of matched filings, active-status records and published identifiers.
The lot
The lot holds a 3-story store building built in 1931, with 3 homes, on a 3,740 sq ft lot.
Housing violations
9 violations are open against this address under the Housing Maintenance Code. 2 of them are the class the city calls immediately hazardous.
Open means the Department of Housing Preservation and Development has not recorded it as corrected, which is not the same as nobody having fixed it. The city publishes the apartment each was written against; that is not carried here, because a count says a building has a problem and an apartment number says whose.
The apartments
18 condominium apartments are assessed on this block, and the typical one is 1,030 sq ft (96 m²). They run from 94 to 153 m².
The city values the typical one at $938,400. That is the Department of Finance’s market valuation for tax, not an asking price and not a sale.
Owner of record
1357 60 ST LLC
As the assessment roll records it. Only owners that read as a company are shown here; where the roll names an individual, nothing is published.
Lot facts come from NYC Department of City Planning, Primary Land Use Tax Lot Output (PLUTO) (64uk-42ks), accessed Sep 19, 2026. They describe the tax lot, not any single filing. When the rest of New York went up
Violation record
The Department of Buildings has 14 open notices on record for this building, out of 15 notices on file; the most recent was issued Jan 3, 2008.
Issued Jan 3, 2008
Issued Jan 6, 2006
Issued Jan 31, 2005
11 further open notices are on file. Open the source dataset for the full list.
Open means the agency has not recorded a resolution, which is not the same as the problem still existing. What a violation is, and what it is not. From NYC Department of Buildings, DOB Violations (3h2n-5cm9), accessed Sep 19, 2026.
What is recorded here
New York City's Building Identification Number helps connect filings that may use different application numbers or describe different scopes of work. The records below are grouped because they publish BIN 3331022. They should not be read as a single construction project unless the underlying filings say so.
The matched set includes 1 alteration filing. Its latest status categories are 1 recorded as completed. Each filing page preserves its own status, dates, scope and source identifier.
Highest recorded values may come from different filings and must not be combined into one proposed project. Open the individual filings below for their exact scope. Values outside the publication's conservative data-quality bounds are withheld pending source review.
Address alerts
Get an email when NewYorkDaily detects a material change in the public DOB records associated with 5922 New Utrecht Avenue.
Confirmation is required. Alerts describe source-data changes, not confirmed construction activity. Unsubscribe at any time. Privacy
Recorded history
Every dated event the city has published for this building, from all 1 matched filings, in the order it was recorded. A date marks what entered the public record, not what happened on site.
Installation of new kitchen mechanical exhaust system for commercial kitchen of eating and drinking establish, including two (2) type i hood. no change in use, egress, or occupancy under this filing. Filing B01410992-I1.
Filing B01410992-I1 reached an approved status.
DOB lists a first permit date for B01410992-I1. That is not by itself confirmation of activity on site.
DOB recorded a sign-off for B01410992-I1.
The latest status recorded for B01410992-I1 is “LOC Issued.”