STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:ARL 09586-K
IMPACT DEVELOPMENT CORP., RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
c/o REHAB ASSOCIATES, DOCKET NO.: KS 000871-OM
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
AND REMANDING PROCEEDING FOR MINISTERIAL PROCESSING
On July 18, 1986 the above-named petitioner-owner filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against an order issued on July 9, 1986 by the
District Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York
concerning housing accommodations known as 720 DeGraw Street, Brooklyn,
New York, various apartments.
The issue in this proceeding is whether the District Rent Administrator's
order was warranted.
The applicable section of the law is Section 9 NYCRR 2522.4 of the Rent
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issue
raised by the administrative appeal.
On November 25, 1985 the owner completed the filing of an application to
increase the stabilized rents based upon major capital improvements
consisting of a new intercom system, steam cleaning building-wide,
pointing and waterproofing where necessary, repairing of lintels, and
painting of window sills. The owner submitted documentary evidence
showing that it had made expenditures totalling $12,965.00 for said
In answer to the application, one tenant objected to the increase.
The District Rent Administrator's order, appealed herein, determined that
the installation of a new intercom system at a cost of $1,965.00 qualified
as a major capital improvement, and granted the owner increases in the
stabilized rents of the subject building. (The order did not actually
state the improvements which qualified for a rent increase, but the new
intercom system was clearly intended, as it was the only item not
disallowed, and the cost equalled the expenditure for the new intercom
In this petition, the owner contends, in substance, that pointing and
waterproofing does not have to be done to every square inch of the outside
DOCKET NUMBER: ARL 09586-K
walls to qualify for a rent increase as a major capital improvement, but
rather only done where necessary to make the building watertight.
In answer, one tenant asserts, in substance, that there are various fire
hazards in the subject building, and that the new intercom system does not
function properly. In a subsequent letter the tenant states that he is
satisfied with the work performed and that he has no objections to the
rent increases for major capital improvements.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this administrative appeal should
be granted and the proceeding remanded to the District Rent Administrator
for ministerial processing.
The evidence of record indicates that it was improper to disallow the
owner appropriate rent increases for pointing and waterproofing, and for
steam cleaning performed in conjunction with such pointing and
The record shows that a contractor examined all exposed sides of the
building and determined that only the front and left sides of the building
required pointing. A diagram submitted by the owner indicating the
location of the work performed shows that the entire front and left sides
of the building were pointed. The owner satisfied the Division's
requirement that the work be performed where necessary and also be
comprehensive in nature. It was therefore improper for the Rent
Administrator to disallow the cost for pointing and waterproofing because
only two of the building's four sides were pointed. In addition, the cost
for steam-cleaning which is performed in conjunction with allowable
pointing and waterproofing work is also considered an allowable expense.
It was proper for the Rent Administrator to disallow costs of $300.00 for
repair of lintels and $200.00 for pointing of window sills as such work is
considered ordinary maintenance and repair.
In view of the foregoing, it is the opinion of the Commissioner that this
proceeding should be remanded to the Administrator for a recomputation of
the appropriate rental adjustment in accordance with this order and
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, granted to the
extent of remanding this proceeding to the District Rent Administrator for
further processing in accordance with this order and opinion. The
previously ordered rent increase based upon a new intercom system will
remain in full effect until, as well as after, a new order is issued.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner