Misc 3d at 489-90, Castillo, supra, 63 Misc 3d at 1235(A). The Court dismisses so much
of Respondents' fifth affirmative defense as seeks relief on this ground.
Evidence of DOB and Respondents regarding other defenses and
harassment
Respondents introduced into evidence an appraisal of the subject premises ("the
Appraisal"). The Appraisal evaluated the subject premises based on its "as is" value.
The Appraisal states that the subject premises is in poor condition reflecting deferred
maintenance; that the highest and best use of the subject premises is a continuity of its
prior use as a Single-Room Occupancy ("SRO") building; that, applying an income
approach, if the subject premises was repaired so as to be habitable as an SRO building
again and fully leased to rent-stabilized tenants at legal regulated rents, the value per
residential unit would be $52,083; and that, if site of the subject premises was vacant, the
land value would be greater. As the subject premises has 48 units, at $52,083 per unit,
the total value of the subject premises would be $2,499,984, which the Appraisal
rounded up to $2.5 million.
Respondents introduced into evidence a report written by an engineer that
Respondents retained ("Respondents' expert's report"). Respondents' expert's report
states that the subject premises is in an overall state of disrepair, requiring substantial
remedial work to building systems; that walls were delaminated and bulging; that
brownstone brick masonry was spalling; that the north walls of 221 and 223 should be
completely demolished and reconstructed to address the distress deterioration; that the
masonry roof membranes exhibited severe displacement, being weathered and cracked;