STATE OF NEW YORK
                      DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
                            OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
                                     GERTZ PLAZA
                               92-31 UNION HALL STREET
                               JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433

          -------------------------------------X   ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE      DOCKET NO.:  DK430348RO
          APPEAL OF
                    L & S EQUITIES CO. 
                                                   RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                   DOCKET NO.:  ZDA430141OM

                                   PETITIONER
          -------------------------------------X

          ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

          The above-named petitioner-owner timely filed an administrative 
          appeal against an order issued on September 20, 1989 by the Rent 
          Administrator (92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, NY) concerning the 
          housing accommodations known as 162 West 4th Street, New York, NY, 
          various apartments, wherein the Administrator denied major capital 
          improvement (MCI) rent increases for the controlled and stabilized 
          apartments in the subject premises based on the installation of 48 
          new windows at the premises.

          This proceeding was commenced on January 9, 1989 by the owner 
          filing an application for Major Capital Improvement (MCI) rent 
          increases for the installation of 48 new windows.  The owner 
          indicated in the application that the total number of windows in 
          all apartments in the building is 87, that 48 new windows had been 
          installed in April of 1988, 5 new windows had been installed in 
          1983 and 34 new windows had been installed in April of 1986.  The 
          owner submitted documentary evidence in support of the application.

          Various tenants responded stating, among other things, that they 
          were already paying a rent increase for windows installed, with 
          their consent, in 1986. 

          On September 20, 1989, the Rent Administrator issued an order which 
          disallowed rent increases for the new window installation based on 
          a determination that said installation did not constitute an MCI.

          On appeal, the owner contends, in substance, that all of the 
          windows have been replaced; that it was not requesting a rent 
          increase for the windows which were previously installed; and that 
          it was moved to make the current installation because of other 
          exterior work performed at the subject premises.

          After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record the 
          Commissioner is of the opinion that the administrative appeal 
          should be denied.












          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. DK-430348-RO

          Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by 
          Section 2202.4 of the Rent and Eviction Regulations for rent 
          controlled apartments and Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization 
          Code for the rent stabilized apartments.  Under rent control, an 
          increase is warranted where there has been since July 1, 1970 a 
          major capital improvement required for the operation, preservation, 
          or maintenance of the structure.  Under rent stabilization, the 
          improvement must generally be building-wide; depreciable under the 
          Internal Revenue Code, other than for ordinary repairs; required 
          for the operation, preservation, and maintenance of the structure; 
          and replace an item whose useful life has expired.

          It is the established position of the Division that the building- 
          wide installation of new apartment windows and/or public area 
          windows to replace windows which are 25 or more years old 
          constitutes a major capital improvement for which a rent increase 
          adjustment may be warranted, provided the owner otherwise so 
          qualifies.  In this respect, the Commissioner notes that work of a 
          piecemeal nature or ordinary repairs and maintenance does not 
          qualify as a major capital improvement.

          However, in recognition of the fact that there are limited 
          circumstances where the replacement of all windows would be an 
          unnecessary and unwarranted expense, the Commissioner has adopted 
          the position that where an owner has earlier installed new windows 
          the condition of which are such that their replacement is not 
          required or due to the special characteristics of certain other 
          windows which are clearly of a distinct and different nature, that 
          the subsequent replacement of all other apartment windows totalling 
          at a minimum at least 80% of the total number of apartment windows 
          in the building as part of a unified plan and consecutively timed 
          project complete within a reasonable time frame would substantially 
          comply with the requirement of a major capital improvement.

          In this proceeding, a review of the record, including documentation 
          and information submitted by the owner, indicates that of the 87 
          apartment windows at the subject premises, 48 new windows or 55% 
          were installed in 1988 and 39 new windows were installed in 1983 
          and 1986, according to the owner.  Accordingly, the Commissioner 
          finds that the Administrator properly disallowed rent increases for 
          the new window installation based upon the fact that the subsequent 
          window installation (in 1988) consisted of the replacement of less 
          than 80% of the total number of apartment windows in the building.















          ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. DK-430348-RO

          THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations and the Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is

          ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and 
          the order of the Rent Administrator be, and the same hereby is, 
          affirmed.

          ISSUED:



                                                       ____________________
                                                        Joseph A. D'Agosta
                                                        Deputy Commissioner






    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name