Adjoining Buildings Had Enough Common Systems to Constitute HMD

Tenant of a building containing four apartments claimed that she was rent stabilized because her building, together with the building next door, was a horizontal multiple dwelling containing six or more apartments and therefore subject to rent stabilization. The DRA ruled for tenant.

Landlord appealed and lost. Prior landlord had registered tenant's building as rent stabilized. HPD I-cards from 1935 showed that only one of the two buildings had a central heating plant. Landlord admitted that the two buildings had a shared heating system when he bought the property in 2003. The DHCR's inspector also saw the shared system, which controlled heat and hot water for both buildings. In addition, each building had four apartments, a common lighting system for the outside perimeter of the two buildings, a common cellar separated by a party wall, shared roof space, common fire escape, and an identical exterior facade for both buildings. Athough landlord pointed out that there were separate entranceways, interior hallways and stairways, bell and buzzer systems, mail systems, MDR numbers, lot numbers and billing for real estate, water service, and sewer taxes, the other common features were sufficient to find that the two buildings were an HMD. And, while there were separate gas and electric meters and separate billing for them, there was no proof that these items were separate on the base date when the building became subject to rent stabilization.

Pollock: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. BO420054RO (6/27/18) [6-pg. doc.]