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.: DD110391RT
APPEAL OF
Robert Houser
RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONER DOCKET NO.: AL110074OM
-----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The petitioner-tenant timely refiled an administrative appeal
against an order issued on March 1, 1989, by the Rent Administrator
(92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New York) concerning the housing
accommodations known as 32-56 41st Street, Astoria, New York,
apartment 2E, wherein the Administrator granted major capital
improvement (MCI) rent increases for the controlled and stabilized
apartments in the subject premises based on the installation of
apartment windows with screens, pointing, replacement of lintels,
and exterior and interior house entrance doors at the subject
premises.
On appeal, the petitioner-tenant states, in substance, that the
improvements were implemented without the tenants' permission; the
owner's only purpose was to increase the value of his property; and
the improvements in question were cosmetic in nature and provide no
benefit to the tenants.
After a careful consideration of the entire evidence of record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that this administrative appeal
should be denied.
Rent increases for MCIs are authorized by Section 2202.4 of the
Rent and Eviction Regulations for the 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 an MCI required for the
operation, preservation, and maintenance of the structure. Under
rent stabilization, the improvement must general y 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.
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DD110391RT
It is the established position of the Division that the
installations of apartment windows, screens, pointing, replacement
of lintels under the circumstances herein, and exterior and
interior entrance doors, as in the instant case, qualify as MCIs.
The fact that the work also benefits the owner does not bar an
owner's entitlement to a rent increase if the work otherwise
qualifies as an MCI. With regard to the tenant's assertion that the
tenants never consented to the installations, the Commissioner
notes that such consent is not necessary in this kind of
proceeding.
The evidence of record in the instant case indicates that the owner
fully substantiated its application and correctly complied with the
application procedures for an MCI, and that the Rent Administrator
properly computed the appropriate rent increase. On the other hand,
the tenant has not submitted any evidence to prove that the
increase should be revoked.
On the basis of the entire evidence of record, it is found that the
Administrator's order is correct and should be affirmed.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, the Rent and Eviction Regulations for
the City of New York, and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this administrative appeal be, and the same hereby
is, denied; and that the Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
-------------------------------
Joseph A. D'Agosta
Deputy Commissioner
|
