For the second time this year, a White Plains landlord has been sued for allegedly blocking a developer from erecting scaffolding around his property so that work on a new residential project can proceed.
Chatterton Hill Realty LLC petitioned Westchester Supreme Court on Nov. 4 for an order granting it a license for access to 75 South Broadway LLC to erect and maintain scaffolding.
Zef Perlleshi, the manager of 75 South Broadway, has allegedly demanded that Chatteron Hill replace an expensive part of his building HVAC system that he claims the developer damaged.
Chatterton has denied damaging the equipment and characterized the condition as an “unreasonable and extortionate demand.”
The dispute mirrors a lawsuit filed this past March by a Brooklyn developer who is renovating the former Esplanade building on Lyon Place behind Chatterton”™s project.
Arthouse WP Development LLC needed access to the roof at 75 South Broadway to put up scaffolding and was willing to pay up to $2,000 a month for a license. Perlleshi allegedly proposed a $65,000 a month fee.
The new dispute with Chatterton, an affiliate of Sackman Enterprises Inc., a Manhattan firm that bought a one-story building at 199 ”“ 201 East Post Road for $800,000 in 2016.
The storefront had once been home to the Thirsty Turtle. Chatterton is expanding the saloon space for use as a restaurant and patio on the ground floor and adding three floors with 18 apartments.
The $7.6 million project (as of early 2020) needs access to three adjacent properties to put up scaffolding for a few months so workers can install a new façade and fix a basement wall.
City and state laws require developers to protect abutting properties during construction.
Two neighboring businesses on East Post Road granted access licenses “with minimal negotiation and minimal license fee payments,” the petition states.
But Chatterton says it still needs a license to 75 South Broadway, a 4-story office building around the corner from the project site, to erect scaffolding.
Perlleshi allegedly demanded that Chatterton replace rooftop chillers on his roof that he claimed had been damaged by water leaking from the developer”™s property. Chatterton says the chillers could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The developer denied causing any damages to Perlleshi”™s building, refused to replace the chillers and “viewed such a demand as a nonstarter in any reasonable negotiation.”
Negotiations continued through October but the parties have been unable to reach an agreement.
Chatteron argues that Perlleshi negotiated in bad faith, leveraging the developer”™s need for access to pay for chillers.
Perlleshi”™s attorney Jan A. Marcus did not respond to an email asking for his client”™s side of the story.
But in April Perlleshi adamantly disputed similar allegations in the Arthouse lawsuit. That developer had created the impression that he was being unreasonable, Perlleshi stated in an affidavit, and “that I am attempting some type of ”˜money grab”™ by being recalcitrant in granting Arthouse the license it seeks. Nothing could be further from the truth.”
He said he was not adverse to the project but he objected to Arthouse”™s version of the facts. He claimed that even before the developer got a demolition permit, for instance, construction began and bricks fell and damaged his roof.
Twenty percent of 75 South Broadway was vacant and several leases were coming up for renewal. Tenants were already complaining about noise and vibration from the Arthouse construction, and scaffolding would have a negative impact on potential renters.
He said he wanted $30,000 to $60,000 a month for lost rents, a limit to how long the construction would last, and sufficient insurance against construction damages.
“It is outrageous,” Perlleshi stated, that Arthouse depicts 75 South Broadway as the one “who is not playing by the rules.”
That case was settled in June and the terms were not publicly disclosed.
