Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, February 21, 2006

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Wasserman Grubin & Rogers, LLP, New York City (Richard Wasserman of counsel), for appellant. John D. Gorman, New York City, for respondent.

Per Curiam.

Order, dated June 23, 2004, affirmed, with $10 costs.

The 2003 amendment (L 2003, ch 82, § 6) to the Rent Stabilization Law of 1969 (Administrative Code of City of NY) § 26-501 et seq. (RSL) permits an owner to discontinue a preferential rent and to resume charging the legal regulated rent upon a renewal lease. RSL § 26-511 (c) (14) pertinently provides that where a tenant is charged and pays a preferential rent, "the amount of rent . . . which may be charged upon renewal or upon vacancy . . . may, at the option of the owner, be based upon [either such preferential rent or an amount not more than the] previously established legal regulated rent . . . ."

Despite its seemingly broad sweep, "the 2003 amendment was not intended to preclude the parties to a lease or stipulation from agreeing to a rent preference that would endure beyond the terms of the lease into renewal periods" (Aijaz v Hillside Place, LLC, 8 Misc 3d 73, 76 [2005]). Thus, where an owner and tenant expressly agree that a preferential rent will last for the life of the tenancy, the tenant is entitled to have such a lease provision carried over into subsequent renewal leases (id.).

The preferential lease rider under review here unequivocally and explicitly provides for a rent concession for the duration of the tenancy. Since the parties' intent is clearly and unambiguously manifested in the written agreement, the agreement controls, and tenant is [*2]entitled to the benefit of the preferential rent provision throughout his tenancy (see Matter of Century Operating Corp. v Popolizio, 60 NY2d 483 [1983]; Matter of Missionary Sisters of Sacred Heart, Ill. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 283 AD2d 284 [2001]).

Suarez, P.J., Davis and Gangel-Jacob, JJ., concur.