Landlord Proves Building Exempt Based on Substantial Rehab

Landlord claimed that building was exempt from rent stabilization based on substantial rehabilitation after Jan. 1, 1974. The DRA ruled against landlord. Although the DRA found that landlord had replaced at least 75 percent of the building-wide and apartment systems, the building wasn't in a substandard or seriously deteriorated condition when landlord did the work. Landlord appealed, claiming that the DRA's findings were mistaken. Landlord said that the entire building was vacant and dilapidated on or before December 2005 and remained vacant until landlord started the rehab work in August 2006. The DHCR ruled for landlord. Landlord had submitted to the DRA a statement that any remaining tenants had moved out of the building during 2005. In addition, landlord's architect had submitted a statement that when construction started in August 2006, the building was vacant, in very bad condition, and needed major renovation. Because the building was at least 80 percent vacant at the time that work began, landlord met the requirements for exemption based on substantial rehabilitation.

Cholakian: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. VG210054RO (1/9/08) [3-pg. document]