## Facts

- Four mobility-impaired tenants lived in a New York City apartment building owned by 551 West 157th Street Owners Corp.
- The building was constructed in 1910 and had an entrance with multiple steps that prevented the tenants from entering and exiting without assistance.
- The tenants requested that the landlord install a ramp or lift to make the entrance wheelchair-accessible.
- The landlord refused, citing the building’s age and configuration and the expense and difficulty of the requested construction.
- The tenants sued under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and parallel New York state and city human-rights laws, and also asserted a New York City Building Code theory.
- Both sides moved for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether the FHA’s “reasonable accommodation” requirement obligated a landlord of an older, pre-amendment building to construct and pay for a ramp or lift to provide accessible entry.
2. Whether refusal to install a ramp or lift constituted unlawful disability discrimination under the FHA and analogous New York state and city statutes.
3. Whether the New York City Building Code required the landlord to retrofit the existing entrance to provide wheelchair access under these circumstances.

## Decision

- The court denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
- The court held that the FHA did not require the landlord to construct and finance a ramp or lift for this pre-amendment building.
- The court rejected the state and city human-rights claims as not imposing a broader duty on these facts.
- The court rejected the building-code claim, finding no applicable mandate requiring the requested retrofit.
- Judgment was entered for the landlord, dismissing all claims.

## Legal Principles

- FHA accessibility design-and-construction requirements applicable to certain newer multifamily dwellings are not retroactive to buildings constructed long before those provisions took effect.
- The FHA’s “reasonable accommodation” duty generally concerns changes to rules, policies, practices, or services, not compelled, landlord-funded major structural reconstruction of older buildings.
- For existing premises, the FHA contemplates “reasonable modifications” as structural changes made at the disabled person’s expense, subject to reasonable conditions, unless an independent state or local law specifically shifts the cost.
- Parallel New York state and city disability-discrimination provisions, as applied here, did not require a landlord to pay for and perform major structural accessibility alterations to an older residential building.
- A building-code violation requires an applicable provision that mandates the claimed retrofit; the mere presence of disabled tenants does not itself create a retrofit obligation absent such a mandate.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that neither the FHA nor the asserted New York state, city, or building-code provisions required the owner of an older apartment building to fund and construct a ramp or lift as a disability accommodation, and it granted summary judgment dismissing the tenants’ claims.


Rodriguez v. 551 W. 157th St. Owners Corp., 992 F. Supp. 385 (S.D.N.Y. 1998)