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.: EF430022RO
APPEAL OF
JUNO ASSOCIATES RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
DOCKET NO.: CI430245OM
PETITIONER
-------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING, IN PART, PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
REVIEW AND REMANDING PROCEEDING TO THE RENT ADMINISTRATOR
On June 11, 1990 the above named petitioner-owner timely filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) against an order issued on
May 7, 1990, by a Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street,
Jamaica, New York, concerning the housing accommodations known as
167 Avenue A, New York, New York, various apartments, wherein the
MCI application was denied.
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 this Petition for Administrative Review.
The owner commenced this proceeding on September 30, 1988 by
initially filing a major capital improvement rent increase
application based on the following installations:
(1) Roof $20,126.63
(2) Intercom $ 570.00
(3) Staircase $31,490.00
(4) Hallway $19,490.00
(5) Hot water heater $ 3,629.35
(6) Lobby $ 2,050.00
For a total claimed cost of $77,355.98
On February 11, 1989, the Division of Housing and Community Renewal
(DHCR) served each tenant with notice of the MCI application and
afforded the tenants the opportunity to review the application and
comment thereon.
In response thereto the tenants alleged, in substance, that the
roof repair was shoddy and continued to leak, the intercom did not
need replacement, the hallways were only cosmetically repaired, the
new hot water heater was not as efficient as the replaced one, and
the stairs were only replaced because they were in violation of
fire and safety codes.
ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. EF-430022-RO
On May 7, 1990, the Rent Administrator issued the order here under
review, finding that the roof, the intercom and, the hot water
heater installations all qualified as major capital improvements,
determining that the part of the application pertaining to said
installations complied with the relevant laws and regulations based
upon the supporting documentation submitted by the owner, and
authorizing rent increases for rent controlled and rent stabilized
apartments. The Administrator also determined that the staircase,
the hallway and the lobby work did not meet the criteria of an MCI.
In this petition for administrative review, the owner request
modification of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges, in
substance, that full replacement of a staircase from first floor to
the roof meets all of the requirements of an MCI; that the hallway
and lobby work are also MCIs or, in the alternative, work done in
conjunction with qualifying MCIs, the stairs and the intercom; and
that a rent increase should be given for the stairs, hallway and
lobby.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that this petition should be granted in part and that this
proceeding should be remanded to the Rent Administrator for further
consideration.
Rent increases for major capital improvements are authorized by
Section 2522.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code for rent stabilized
apartments. 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.
Based upon the evidence in record, the Commissioner finds that the
replacement of an entire staircase, from ground floor to roof does
qualify as an MCI.
The record is unclear, however, as to the question of whether the
hallway and/or lobby are to be considered work performed in
conjunction with the qualifying staircase and intercom
replacements. This issue is to be remanded to the Administrator
for further consideration and is deemed appropriate to ascertain
the amount of the rent increase to which the owner is entitled.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is granted, in
part, and that the proceeding be, and the same hereby is, remanded
to the Rent Administrator for further processing in accordance with
this order and opinion. The order and determination of the Rent
Administrator remains in full force and effect until a new order is
issued on remand.
ISSUED:
____________________
Joseph A. D'Agosta
2 Deputy Commissioner
|
