Stuyvesant Town

Explore CHPC's analysis of the legal issues surrounding Stuyvesant Town and historical research into the development's planning, which spawned a stage play.

After Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village were purchased, a group of tenants brought legal action to challenge the new owners’ ability to take apartments out of rent stabilization through the “luxury decontrol” rules which came into effect in 1993. Under that provision of the law, when rents exceed $2,000 on vacancy or when an existing tenant’s income exceeds $175,000 and the rent for their apartment exceeds $2,000, the owner can apply to DHCR to remove that apartment from rent stabilization.

We have followed the case since 2007, when Judge Richard B. Lowe of the New York State Supreme Court indicated that accepting J-51 tax benefits from New York City did not prevent a building owner from utilizing the high rent and luxury decontrol provisions of the rent stabilization law.

Our aim through the process has been to write clear, straightforward briefings on the latest news coming out of the case to make sure that people are correctly informed about this complicated and controversial issue. See all of the latest news here.

Featured Impact
“The Stuyvesant Town: This Is Your Home” Premiered at the Signature Theatre

On Dec 10th 2012, CHPC’s original production “The Stuyvesant Town: This Is Your Home” premiered at the Frank Gehry-designed Pershing Square Signature Theatre on West 42nd Street. It was a smashing success! The night began with a wine and cheese reception in the second floor lobby of the spectacular Signature Theatre. More than 250 prominent guests attended the event.

Publications ×+

Inside Edge: Fallout from Roberts vs. Tishman

In the September 2007 edition of the Inside Edge, we reported on the decision of Judge Richard B. Lowe of the New York State Supreme Court which indicated that accepting J-51 tax benefits from New York City did not prevent a building owner from utilizing the high rent and luxury decontrol provisions of the rent stabilization law. As of March 5, 2009 the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court has reversed that decision and ruled that if you accept J-51 benefits you may not utilize the high rent and luxury decontrol provisions of rent stabilization. This Inside Edge explains the new ruling and its impacts, which will extend far beyond Stuyvesant Town into the 350,000 units of rental housing now receiving J-51 benefits.


Inside Edge: Court of Appeals Delivers Final Word on Stuy Town

The Inside Edge has been closely following the case of Roberts vs. Tishman from Supreme Court to the Appellate Division. Now the Court of Appeals has issued a ruling that finally settles the issue of whether buildings with J-51 tax benefits can utilize the luxury decontrol provisions of the rent stabilization law. They can’t.


Inside Edge: Stuy Town J-51 Decision Reversed

In the September 2007 edition of the Inside Edge, we reported on the decision of Judge Richard B. Lowe of the New York State Supreme Court which indicated that accepting J-51 tax benefits from New York City did not prevent a building owner from utilizing the high rent and luxury decontrol provisions of the rent stabilization law. As of March 5, 2009 the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court has reversed that decision and ruled that if you accept J-51 benefits you may not utilize the high rent and luxury decontrol provisions of rent stabilization. This Inside Edge explains the new ruling and its impacts, which will extend far beyond Stuyvesant Town into the 350,000 units of rental housing now receiving J-51 benefits.

 


Inside Edge: Rent Stabilization and the J-51 Tax Benefit

After Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village (STPCV) were sold, a group of tenants brought legal action to challenge the new owners’ ability to take apartments out of Rent Stabilization through the “luxury decontrol” rules which came into effect in 1994. Under that provision of the law, when rents exceed $2,000 on vacancy or when an existing tenant’s income exceeds $175,000 and the rent for their apartment exceeds $2,000 the owner could apply to DHCR to remove that apartment from Rent Stabilization. Since the law went into effect more than 64,599 apartments have been removed from Rent Stabilization under those provisions.


Latest Insights
November 25, 2017 - by CHPC
November 14, 2017 - by CHPC
Support CHPC

Your contribution will provide critical support for our research and advocacy efforts, which shape key policies that improve housing throughout the city.

Donate