Replacing Doormen and Elevator Operator with Technology Was Inadequate Substitution

Landlord applied to the DHCR for permission to modify building services for 55 rent-regulated apartments by removing the doormen and elevator operator, and substituting electronic sliding doors, a 24-hour concierge, and 65 security cameras. Tenants objected to landlord's request and pointed out that it had already implemented the proposed changes before obtaining DHCR approval. Tenants also argued that the proposed single concierge couldn't monitor the "50-plus" security cameras while performing other outlined duties.

The DRA ruled against landlord, finding that eliminating two doormen and replacing them with monitored technology wasn't consistent with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code. The DRA also found that the number of building staff already had been reduced, and that it wasn't practical to expect one concierge to perform all the tasks previously done by two doormen or to effectively monitor footage from the planned 65 cameras.

Landlord appealed and lost. The proposed modifications didn't provide adequate substitutions of service. Some other cases that landlord claimed had approved similar proposals were not factually similar to this matter. 

30 Park Avenue LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. LO410010RO (11/21/23)[4-pg. document]