Outdoor Recreation Area Not Provided on Base Date

Tenant complained of reduced services, claiming that landlord had converted an outdoor recreation area to a parking lot. Landlord argued that the parking lot replaced a side lawn, which didn't have an outdoor recreation area on the base date. The DRA ruled for landlord, and tenant appealed. The DHCR upheld the DRA's ruling, and tenant appealed again. This time, tenant submitted affidavits from other tenants, as well as photographs, which allegedly represented the recreation area. Landlord argued that the DHCR shouldn't grant tenant's appeal because no recreation area had been provided on the base date. Also, tenant had already reached an agreement with landlord to withdraw all pending complaints concerning the parking lot. The DHCR ruled for landlord. Tenant didn't prove there was an outdoor recreation area on the base date. The property never contained any facilities or equipment usually associated with recreation areas. And, in any event, the agreement reached by tenant and landlord ended the dispute.

Gross: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. IA 110012-RP (7/27/94) [7-page document]