DOCKET NO.: CG 830199-RO
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 APPEAL
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO. CG 830199-RO
: DRO DOCKET NOS. PBC-8-1-0001/OM
PLEASANTVILLE HILL ASSOCIATES, PBF-8-1-0003/OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On July 18, 1988, the above-named petitioner Pleasantville Hill Associates
filed a Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) against an order issued
on June 15, 1988, by the Rent Administrator at Gertz Plaza, Jamaica, New
York, concerning housing accommodations known as building-wide at 580-590-
600 Bedford Road, Pleasantville, NY 10570 wherein the Rent Administrator
consolidated two applications for major capital improvements and partially
granted and partially denied both of them as follows:
The Administrator found that the replacement windows, fascia replacement,
heating system, and new entrance doors to the apartments and public
entrances constituted a major capital improvement of $68,201.24.
The Rent Administrator further found that the following installations did
not constitute a major capital improvement: garage door replacement (not
applicable to all tenants), supplies and tools, landscaping, turn around,
entrance way repair and sidewalks; which she determined to be deferred
repairs and maintenance. In total of $148,088.18 was disallowed.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and has
carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issues
raised by the administrative appeal.
The owner commenced this proceeding by filing two application for major
capital improvements in 1987 for work completed in 1985-86 described as
Docket #PBC-8-1-0001/OM for replacement
windows/new fascia $140,720.47
Docket #PBF-8-1-0003/OM for heating system;
front doors; entrance ways; garage doors;
turnaround totaling $200,329.37
It should be noted that the subject complex is currently a condominium.
The condominium plan was declared effective on March 6, 1987 by acceptance
of the filing of the First Amendment to the Greenwood Condominium offering
plan by the State Attorney General.
At the time that the subject PAR was filed on July 1988 the owner
DOCKET NO.: CG 830199-RO
contended that 580 Bedford Road has 12 of 48 units still covered by ETPA.
590 Bedford Avenue had 20 of 24 units still covered by ETPA and 600
Bedford Avenue had 11 of 45 units still covered by ETPA.
Further the 117 unit building complex has 53 individual garages with only
seven of the ETPA tenants not having garage spaces at the time the PAR was
Many of the ETPA tenants answered the owner's two consolidated
applications for major capital improvements. Their arguments were similar
The ETPA regulated answering tenants contended: 1) that the new boiler
supplied insufficient heat and hot water; 2) that the new fire proof doors
are hollow, while the originals were solid wood; 3) further that the owner
removed the service of screen doors for apartments due to fire code
provisions; 4) that the turnaround is inconvenient to most tenants for
parking and is instead used by area resident making turns; 5) that the
replacement of concrete entranceways and sidewalks were normal
maintenance; and 6) that the new garage doors are not used by all the ETPA
tenants, since some don't have garage spaces.
On June 15, 1988 the Rent Administrator issued the order here under
review, finding that some of the installations qualified as major capital
improvements and allowed appropriate rent increases for ETPA tenants for
new windows and/or other allowed improvements. The Rent Administrator
also in the consolidated order disallowed the garage door replacements as
not affecting all ETPA tenants; and disallowed the concrete entranceway,
landscaping and turnaround work as mere maintenance and repair.
The owner in the subject PAR contends that the denial of garage door
improvements was arbitrary since he alleges only seven ETPA apartments:
(#580/1, 580/3, 580/5, 590/23, 600/13, 620/14, and 600/15) do not have
The owner contends that the improvements assigned docket #PBF-8-1-0003/OM
are in fact major capital improvements and substantial rehabilitation
rather than ordinary repairs and maintenance as alleged by the
Commissioner. The owner therefore claims he is entitled to the full
$200,329.37 major capital improvement increase requested under the two
consolidated docket numbers broken down as follows: heating system -
$43,062.68; front doors $29,312.59, entranceways $65,277.54; garage doors
$22,265.18 and turnaround $40,411.38.
The owner in his PAR therefore requested that the subject District Rent
Administrator's order be modified in grant increases in the legal
regulated rent by $15.60 per month per room, and not in the reduced amount
of $5.31 per room per month as issued.
Several affected tenants answered the owner's PAR. Their contentions in
summary as to the relevant services covered by the owner's PAR are:
1. New garage doors only affected tenant with
DOCKET NO.: CG 830199-RO
2. Not all entranceways in 3 buildings were
replaced. Handrails were removed and only
a few replaced.
After careful consideration the Commissioner is of the opinion that the
owner's petition should be denied.
The garage door replacement was merely deferred maintenance and repair.
The new garage doors and frames were wooden as were the original ones.
Further the new garage doors do not benefit all of the ETPA tenants, as
not all of the lease garage spaces.
Further the supplies and tools, landscaping, turnaround, entrance way
repair and sidewalks are also deferred repairs and maintenance. Further
they do not constitute a major capital improvement required for the
operation, preservation of maintenance of the structure as required by
Sec. 2502.4 of the Tenant Protection Regulations.
Since the tenant's did not file their own PAR against the items that were
approved for a rent increase in the rent administrator's order, that
approval can not be reviewed. However the tenants are advised that they
can file service reduction complaints regarding their PAR answer claims of
inadequate heat; removal of apartment screen doors and problems with
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Emergency Tenant Protection Act, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be denied, and order of the Rent Administrator
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Acting Deputy Commissioner