Building Was Exempt from Rent Stabilization Due to Substantial Rehab

Prior landlord submitted an application to the DHCR in 2004, seeking a ruling that the building was exempt from rent stabilization due to substantial rehabilitation. The DRA dismissed that case because prior landlord didn't submit a new Certificate of Occupancy. But the DHCR stated that landlord could refile later if it obtained the C of O. New landlord later advised the DHCR that a new C of O had been issued in 2013 and the building therefore should be deemed deregulated. But the DRA ruled against landlord because a new RS-3 application hadn't been filed. Landlord appealed and lost in 2019, then filed an Article 78 court proceeding, claiming that the DHCR's decision was arbitrary and unreasonable. The parties agreed to send the case back to the DHCR, which issued new orders. Landlord had filed an RS-3 application in 2019 and submitted documents that supported a finding that the building was exempt. So the DRA issued a ruling in 2021 finding that the building was exempt from rent stabilization. Tenants who lived in the building prior to the sub rehab would remain subject to rent stabilization. 

Monmar Plaza LP: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. IU210003RP, IU210005RP, IU210006RP (5/9/22)[9-pg. document]