In 60 Market Street Assoc. v. Hartnett, 153 A.D.2d 205, 551 N.Y.S.2d 346 (3rd Dep't) aff'd 76 N.Y.2d 993, 565 N.E.2d 1264, 564 N.Y.S.2d 713 (1990), upon review of the determinations of respondent Commissioner of Labor that petitioner had failed to pay prevailing wages and supplements to their workers on a public work project in violation of Labor Law 220, Third Department held that "a contract to lease a privately owned, but not yet built, facility to provide office space for the county's Department of Social Services" does not constitute "a public work project" within the meaning of Labor Law 220. Id. The County had entered into a lease "which called for the construction of a new building to be erected on property owned" by the landlord; "the building was constructed on privately owned property and once completed it was privately, not publicly, owned"; "the project was financed entirely by private funds, no public money was used"; "the county's occupancy rights and obligations under the lease commenced only after the structure was completed"; the lease was for a specific term and "there was no option to renew"; and the landlord "was responsible for 'major capital repairs'". Id. The Third Department thus specifically held that "to characterized the lease arrangement in this instance as a 'public work' contract distorts the very essence of the term".