FC 210363-RT
                                  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
          IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE     ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
          APPEAL OF                               DOCKET NO.:   
                                                  FC 210363-RT             
                 EDWARD GOLDSMITH,                RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
                                                  DOCKET NO.:
                                  PETITIONER      ZBC 210298-OM
          ----------------------------------x


            ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW   


          On March 22, 1991, the above-named tenant refiled a petition  for
          administrative review of an order issued on January 31, 1991,  by
          the Rent Administrator, 92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, 
          New York, concerning the  housing  accommodation  known  as  2245
          Ocean Parkway, Brooklyn, New York, wherein the Rent Administrator 
          determined that the owner was entitled to a rent  increase  based
          on a major capital improvement (MCI).

          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 petition for review.

          The owner, M & R Management Co., Inc., commenced this  proceeding
          on March 20, 1987 by filing an application for  a  rent  increase
          based on a major capital improvement, to wit: new  boiler/burner,
          intercom, mailboxes, vestibule doors, and roof at a total cost of 
          $62,845.00.

          The owner certified that on May 29, 1987 it  served  each  tenant
          with a copy of the application and placed a copy  of  the  entire
          application including all  required  supplements  and  supporting
          documentation with the resident  superintendent  of  the  subject
          building.

          Various tenants filed  objections  to  the  owner's  application,
          asserting continued inadequate  heat  and  hot  water;  continued
          leaks; the vestibule door jams, or closes too  slowly;  the  roof
          installation was routine maintenance, not an entire new roof; and 
          the intercom produced scratchy sounds.


          On February 14 and 21,  1990,  inspections  by  the  Division  of
          Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) found that the  entire  roof
          had been completely resurfaced; that the vestibule door was oper 
          able with no jamming at the time of the inspection; adequate heat 
          and hot water; and the intercom system was operable. 

          On January 31, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the order here 
          under review, finding that the installations qualified  as  major






          FC 210363-RT
          capital improvements, with the exception of the replacement  mail
          boxes, determining that the application complied with  the  rele-
          vant laws and regulations based upon the supporting documentation 
          submitted by the owner, and allowing appropriate  rent  increases
          for rent controlled and rent stabilized apartments.  
                         
          In its petition for administrative review,  the  tenant  requests
          reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and alleges  that  the
          heat is still off for 10-hour periods on frigid  days;  that  the
          roof has large patched sections, and  appears  to  be  a  partial
          repair only, not a new  roof;  and  that  the  new  intercom  was
          unnecessary.

          The owner did not interpose an answer to the tenant's petition.

          After careful consideration the Commissioner is  of  the  opinion
          that this petition should be denied.

          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 t e  Rent  Stabiliza-
          tion Law for 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,  preserva-
          tion, 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 when that item's useful  life  has
          expired.

          The record in the instant case indicates that the owner correctly 
          complied with the application  procedures  for  a  major  capital
          improvement and the  Rent  Administrator  properly  computed  the
          appropriate rent increases.  The tenant has not established  that
          the increase should be revoked.

          This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the  filing
          by the tenant of a complaint of decreased  services,  should  the
          facts so warrant.



          THEREFORE, in accordance with  the  Rent  Stabilization  Law  and
          Code,  it is        

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


          ISSUED:


                                                                           
                                                ELLIOT SANDER
                                                Deputy Commissioner








          FC 210363-RT