STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
9-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
VARIOUS TENANTS OF
230 EAST 167TH STREET, RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S
PETITIONERS CC 630044-OM
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Various tenants of the above-named building refiled a timely
petition for administrative review of an order issued on February
8, 1991, by a Rent Administrator concerning the building known as
230 East 167th Street, Bronx, New York wherein the Re t Adminis-
trator determined that the owner was entitled to a rent increase
based on major capital improvements (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 March 10, 1988 by filing
an application for a rent increase based on major capital
improvements, to wit - new lobby doors and new marble entrance
and flooring at a total cost of $9,754.00.
On July 29, 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
Various tenants responded and one complained that the front
entrance door was falling apart. An inspection completed on
January 8, 1991 failed to provide any indication of the alleged
On February 8, 1991, the Rent Administrator issued the order here
under review finding that the installations 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-
No rent increases were allowed for the new marble entrance or
In their petition for administrative review, the tenants request
reversal of the Rent Administrator's order and allege inter alia
that they should not be made to pay for the new entrance doors
which belong to the owner and about which they were not consulted
prior to the decision by the owner to replace them.
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 consultation
is required for an owner to carry out major capital improvements.
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 prejudi e to the ten-
ant's right to file an application for a rent reduction based on
a diminution of services if the facts so warrant.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and
Code, and the Rent & Eviction Regulations for New York City, it
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied
and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby