FD 610058-RT; et al.
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 REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NOS.:
FD 610058-RT; FD 610061-RT;
MARIA MERCED, PILAR CASTILLO, FD 610066-RT; FD 610161-RT
ANGEL CRUZ and EDWIN CRUZ, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONERS CD 630035-OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The Commissioner has consolidated these petitions as they involve
common questions of law and fact.
Various tenants of the subject building filed timely petitions
for administrative review of an order issued on March 5, 1991,
by a Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodation,
known as 1425 Townsend Avenue, Bronx, 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 commenced this proceeding on April 12, 1988 by filing
an application for a rent increase based on a major capital
improvement, to wit - a new roof at a total cost of $7,500.00.
On October 13, 1988, the Division of Housing and Community
Renewal (DHCR) served each tenant with a copy of the application
and afforded the tenants the opportunity to review it and comment
The tenants did not file any objections to t e owner's applica-
tion although afforded the opportunity to do so.
On March 5, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the order here
under review finding that the installation qualified as a major
capital improvement, determining that the application complied
with the relevant laws and regulations based upon the supporting
documentation submitted by the owner, and allowing appropriate
rent increases for rent controll d and rent stabilized apart-
In their petitions for administrative review, the tenants re-
quest reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and allege in
FD 610058-RT; et al.
substance that they did not agree to the roof installation prior
to the commencement of the work and that a new roof constitutes
maintenance rather than a major capital improvement. Two tenants
further allege service deficiencies in their apartments. The
tenant of Apartment 302 questions the amount of the per room
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 whose useful life has expired.
The Commissioner notes that no tenant permission or agreement is
required prior to an owner's effectuating a major capital
improvement. The rent stabilized tenants of Apartment 302 and
303 are advised that the per room increase granted was $ 0.82.
The tax abatement offset computation applies to rent controlled
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 tenants have not established
that the increase should be revoked.
This order and opinion is issued without prejudice to the ten-
ants' rights to file complaints based on a diminution of services
if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, and the Rent and Eviction Regulations for New York City,
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby
FD 610058-RT; et al.