RENT REGULATION AFTER 50 YEARS An Overview of New York State's Rent Regulated Housing 1993 NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HOUSING & COMMUNITY RENEWAL ================================================================ OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION CASELOADS PROGRAM MISSION The broad social goal of the Office of Rent Administration's regulation of private rental housing is to maintain an adequate supply of decent, affordable housing for approximately 2.5 million New Yorkers. To meet this goal, ORA administers rent control and rent stabilization regulations which are designed to provide owners with an adequate return on investment and tenants with protection from burdensome rent increases in a market with a persistent shortage of decent affordable rental housing. As the sole administrator of the State's rent regulation laws, ORA is responsible for protecting tenants from unlawful rent increases, harassment and the threat of illegal evictions while ensuring their rights to well maintained housing. The agency is directed to safeguard the integrity of the affordable housing stock by providing mechanisms for a reasonable return on investment for owners who maintain their buildings. As the custodian of all official rent records, the Office of Rent Administration has a responsibility to consider and respond to the legitimate inquiries of the tenants and owners of the more than one million regulated apartments. Nearly 300,000 inquiries are made to the agency each year requesting information and assistance, and approximately 50,000 applications and complaints are filed each year. ORGANIZATION The Office of Rent Administration operates within the Division of Housing and Community Renewal. ORA is organized into six bureaus, four of which are the major case processing bureaus. They are the: Overcharge Bureau; S.C.O.R.E. Bureau (Services, Compliance, Owner Restoration, Enforcement); Owner Multiple Bureau; Rent Control/ETPA Bureau. The remaining two bureaus: Policy/Liaison and Management Services provide overall legal and policy direction, public information services, automation support, and records management services to the four processing bureaus. The six bureau chiefs and the head of the Quality Assurance Unit report to the Deputy Commissioner of the Office of Rent Administration. ADMINISTRATIVE CASELOADS BY BUREAU In order to track the hundreds of thousands of applications and complaints that have been filed with ORA, a multifaceted, integrated information system was developed and employed. This automated system, HUTS (History, Update and Tracking System) supports the information needs of all the diverse components in ORA. The HUTS database design accommodates the required integration of information from multiple years registrations, from docketing, tracking and case processing. This system enables ORA to track cases from the time they are filed (docketed) until the cases are resolved at the administrator's or administrative review (PAR) level. Case processing statistics, reported in this chapter, are derived from information entered on the HUTS databases for all case types. As of December 31, 1993, ORA had a pending caseload of 55,382 non- cyclical, administrative cases. Of the total pending, 48% were in the Overcharge Bureau; 35% were in the S.C.O.R.E. Bureau; 14% were in the Rent Control/ETPA Bureau; and 3% were in the Owner Multiple Bureau. ORA's average monthly intake for non-cyclical cases for calendar year 1993 was 3,026 as compared to an average monthly resolution of 2,794 cases. The Owner Multiple Bureau resolved a significantly larger number of cases than were filed during 1993. The resolution rate for the S.C.O.R.E. Bureau and the Rent Control/ETPA Bureau was roughly equivalent to the rate of intake during 1993. However, intake significantly outpaced resolution in the Overcharge Bureau. Overcharge Bureau The Overcharge Complaint Bureau processes overcharge, lease renewal and fair market rent appeal complaints from NYC tenants living in stabilized apartments. Since each apartment's rent is unique and individually developed, overcharge case processing involves the analysis of numerous complex issues and calculations including verification of registration and documentation of individual apartment improvements. The cases must also take into account the impact of service related rent reductions and restorations, MCI increases, and the timeliness of lease renewal offerings and the collection of rental increases. Fair Market Rent Appeals are complaints disputing the amount of the rent charged in a newly stabilized apartment that was formerly rent controlled. The owner must notify the first rent stabilized tenant of the Initial Legal Registered Rent, by certified mail. This notification must take place within 90 days from the date the tenant moves into the apartment. The tenant has 90 days to challenge this rent with the DHCR, otherwise the Initial Legal Registered Rent is no longer subject to challenge by the occupying tenant or any subsequent tenant. As you can see from the chart below, the overwhelming number of administrative cases in the bureau, 81.2%, are rent overcharge cases. The remaining cases consist of lease renewal complaints, 12.6%, and tenant challenges to the apartment registration 6.2%. ================================================================ Overcharge Bureau Administrative Cases Pending Tenant Rent Overcharge Complaint 21,619 Tenant Non-Renewal of Lease Complaint 3,358 Tenant Challenge to Registration 1,660 ------ Total Administrative Cases 26,637 ================================================================ S.C.O.R.E. Bureau The S.C.O.R.E. Bureau (Services, Compliance, Owner Restoration and Enforcement) handles issues involving the maintenance of building-wide or apartment services including determinations of which services are required and what constitutes a reduction in service or failure to provide a service. The Bureau reduces rent when there has been a diminution in services, restores rent when the services have been restored, and secures compliance with DHCR service orders through the imposition of penalties and fines after administrative hearings. The Bureau also enforces the laws relating to harassment and fraud. Under rent control and rent stabilization, owners are required to maintain services included in the rent. Services can be building- wide: elevator service, intercoms and maintenance of public areas of the building; furnished within the individual apartment: a refrigerator, stove, air-conditioning equipment or painting; or ancillary to the tenants' occupancy: garage, laundry or recreational. The S.C.O.R.E. Bureau processes all service reduction complaints. The S.C.O.R.E. Bureau's Compliance Unit enforces owner compliance with orders issued by ORA's Rent Administrators. The majority of orders which the Compliance Unit enforces are for failure to restore individual and building-wide services, and lease renewal cases. Each order, which directs an owner to restore services or to renew a tenant's lease, has a statement of non-compliance for the tenant to submit if the service is not restored or the renewal lease is not provided. S.C.O.R.E.'s Enforcement Unit specifically investigates and prosecutes harassment cases. Harassment by an owner is a course of action intended to drive tenants out of their apartments or to give up rights granted them by the Rent Stabilization Law or Rent Control Law. As of December 31, 1993 there were 1,407 harassment cases pending. The S.C.O.R.E. Bureau's pending caseload was concentrated among several major case types. Complaints concerning services contained in the apartment such as non-working appliances, broken windows and leaking faucets accounted for 45.4% or 8,881 pending cases. Building-wide service complaints such as lack of elevator service, broken intercoms, unsanitary hallways accounted for 12.3% of S.C.O.R.E.'s caseload. If a service reduction has been determined and a rent decrease has been ordered, owners may file for a restoration of the rent after the services have been restored. These applications accounted for 15.7% of S.C.O.R.E.'s pending caseload. Cases involving non-compliance with a previous DHCR order totaled 3,142 or 16.1%. ================================================================ S.C.O.R.E. Bureau Administrative Cases Pending Tenant Building Services Complaint 2,411 Tenant Apartment Services Complaint 8,881 Tenant Heat and Hot Water Complaint 570 Harassment (Enforcement) 1,407 Non-Compliance 3,142 Owner Restoration 3,071 Other Administrative Violations 76 ------ Total Administrative Cases 19,558 ================================================================ Rent Control/ETPA Bureau The Rent Control/ETPA Bureau processes rent control specific cases; provides research data to promulgate the biennial Maximum Base Rent Factor, and Fuel and Labor cost adjustments; processes applications and complaints originating from the Rockland, Westchester and Nassau County Emergency Tenant Protection Act (ETPA) municipalities; operates ETPA District Rent Offices; provides technical assistance to ETPA County Rent Guidelines Boards and executes the annual ETPA fee billing. Each year, owners of all housing accommodations subject to ETPA must complete and certify a "Property Maintenance and Operations Cost Survey Schedule." Bureau staff members use the Surveys to tabulate the change in owners' costs and incomes from year to year. These tabulations are used by the County Rent Guidelines Boards to determine rent guidelines. Among the rent control case types are the automated Maximum Base Rent (MBR) and Fuel Cost Passalong programs, challenges to both the MBR and Fuel programs, rent registration card updates, owner individual filings for rent increases, tax abatements, evictions (both rent control and rent stabilized) and recontrol cases. For the Rent Control/ETPA Bureau, updates of rent control registration cards accounted for 4,666 or 62.1% of the 7,515 pending administrative, non-cyclical caseload. Rent control overcharge complaints accounted for 1,354 cases, or 18.0 percent. In addition, 12.4% or 934 pending cases were accounted for by noncyclical cases in Westchester, Nassau and Rockland counties. The Rent Control/ETPA Bureau processes all cyclical cases. As of December 31, 1993 a total of 13,060 cases were pending. Three out of five (59.9%) pending cyclical cases are filings for the 1994/1995 Maximum Base Rent Cycle. Processing of these cases began in late December, 1993 after the promulgation of the Standard Adjustment Factor for the 1994/95 cycle. Only 14 MBR cases were still pending from the previous cycle. Fuel Cost Passalong cases accounted for almost 3 out of 10 filings that were still pending as of December 31,1993. ================================================================ Rent Control/ETPA Bureau Cyclical Cases Pending Maximum Base Rent 1992-1993 Cycle 14 Fuel Cost Revocation/Suspension 3,217 Fuel Cost Challenge 695 Maximum Base Rent 1994-1995 Cycle 7,819 Decontrol Cases 712 ETPA (Annual Rent Increase) 603 ----- Grand Total Cyclical Cases 13,060 ================================================================ ================================================================ Rent Control/ETPA Administrative Cases Pending Tenant Rent Overcharge Complaint 1,354 ETPA (Non-Cyclical Cases) 934 Registration Update Cases 4,666 Owner Cases 561 ----- Total Administrative Cases 7,515 ================================================================ Owner Multiple Bureau The Owner Multiple Bureau processes building-wide owner applications for rent increases for major capital improvements, hardship increases and owner applications for modifications of individual apartment or building-wide services. Owners who undertake building-wide major capital improvements (MCIs) are allowed increases in rents over and above annual rent guidelines and MBR increases, to compensate them for such investments. These increases are allowed without the consent of the tenants if the improvements are for "the operation, preservation and maintenance of the structure," meet all other criteria established for an MCI and are approved by the Office of Rent Administration. The Owner Multiple Bureau reviews all MCI applications and issues determinations as to eligibility. "Hardship" is the generic term for the set of provisions and procedures that enable owners to file applications for rent adjustments based upon insufficient financial return. The four rent regulatory systems contain varying rent adjustment procedures and formulas. The intent and purpose of the hardship provisions are to act as a safety valve relieving economic pressure on owners confronted with financial difficulties because of administratively set rent levels. The pending non-cyclical case load for the Owner Multiple Bureau consisted almost entirely of Major Capital Improvement applications. MCI's accounted for 93.6% of the Bureau's caseload. ================================================================ OWNER MULTIPLE Bureau Administrative Cases Pending Major Capital Improvement Applications 1,565 Hardship Increase Applications 27 Other 80 ----- Total Administrative Cases 1,672 ================================================================ Major Capital Improvement Applications In 1993 there were 1,256 Major Capital Improvement applications filed, a decrease of 11.4% from the 1992 total of 1,417. For 1993, there were 1,260 separately identifiable types of MCI improvements (many MCI applications contain several improvements and where these improvements were identifiable by type they were included in the table below). Window replacement (28.0%) was the most common type of improvement undertaken. Replacement of heating systems (18.3%) and roofs (12.2%) were the next most common types of improvement. These three types of improvements accounted for almost 60% of the electronically identifiable improvements. See table below. ================================================================ Type of Improvements Ranked by Frequency Of Occurrence MCI Applications, New York City, 1993 Type of Improvement Frequency % of Total Windows 353 28.0% Heating System 230 18.3% Roof 154 12.2% Intercom 102 8.1% Elevators 89 7.1% Electrical (Rewiring) 74 5.9% Pointing & Waterproofing 61 4.8% Compactor 58 4.6% Mail Boxes 47 3.7% Water Heater 19 1.5% Doors 15 1.2% Repiping 14 1.1% Parapets 10 0.7% Other* 34 2.7% Total 1,260 100.0% * The Other category includes items such as courtyards, chimneys, fuel storage tanks, security systems and water tanks ================================================================ Petitions for Administrative Review A tenant, owner or other interested party, such as a receiver or prior owner has a right to file a Petition for Administrative Review (PAR) challenging the correctness of any order issued by a Rent Administrator. The petition must specify the alleged errors and list the issues upon which the order should be reviewed. The filing of a PAR must be made within 35 days of the date of the Rent Administrator's order. As of December 31, 1993 a total of 20,850 PARs were pending. Of the 20,850 pending Petitions for Administrative Review 5,838, or 28.0%, were in the Overcharge Bureau; 5,704 or 27.4% were in the S.C.O.R.E. Bureau; 5,640, or 27.1 percent, were in the Owner Multiple Bureau and 3,668 or 17.6% were in the Rent Control/ETPA Bureau. It is important to note that multiple PARs can be generated from a single administrative determination, such as an MCI, which affects many tenants in a building covered by rent regulation. While the Owner Multiple Bureau accounts for only 3 percent of the pending administrative caseload, more than a quarter of the pending PARs relate to administrative determinations of this bureau. ================================================================= Pending as of December 31, 1993 Petitions for Administrative Review (PAR's) Number Percent ------------------------------------------- ------ ------- S.C.O.R.E. Bureau 5,704 27.4 Overcharge Bureau 5,838 28.0 Owner Multiple Bureau 5,640 27.1 Rent Control/ETPA Bureau 3,668 17.6 ------ ---- Grand Total PARs 20,850 100% Remands & Reconsiderations Number Percent ------------------------------------------- ------ ------- S.C.O.R.E. Bureau 164 18.8 Overcharge Bureau 414 47.5 Owner Multiple Bureau 230 26.4 Rent Control/ETPA Bureau 63 7.2 ------ ---- Grand Total R&Rs 871 100% ================================================================= Geographic Distribution of Selected Casetypes The geographic characteristics of the origin of complaints and applications filed in 1993 for four case types were examined according to postal zip codes of the buildings. As expected the distribution of the filings were closely correlated to the number of rent stabilized units and buildings in an area. Large housing developments in a given zip code, such as Stuyvesant Town in Manhattan, Parkchester in the Bronx and Lefrak City in Queens, tend to skew data for Major Capital Improvement applications or Building-Wide Service complaints for their respective zip codes. When Building-Wide Service complaints are examined on a per building basis, it can be noted that tenants in economically disadvantaged areas tend to file at a higher rate. Tenants in the Upper Manhattan Neighborhoods of Harlem, Morningside Heights, Washington Heights and Manhattanville filed Building-Wide Service complaints at an above average rate. Tenants in Coney Island and Brownsville in Brooklyn, Jamaica in Queens and Soundview in the Bronx also filed at an above average rate. While filings of Building-Wide Service complaints were greater from poor neighborhoods, Major Capital Improvement application filings were above average in neighborhoods with better economic conditions. Rego Park, Forest Hills and sections of Flushing in Queens, and Bensonhurst, Sheepshead Bay and Midwood in Brooklyn reported above average activity. In practically all zip codes throughout the City, less than one percent of tenants in registered stabilized units filed overcharge complaints in 1993. [Note: the following table is formatted for 100 columns] ================================================================================================ SELECTED APPLICATION AND COMPLAINT FILINGS BY ZIP CODE AND NUMBER OF APARTMENTS, REGISTERED BUILDINGS, 1993 BRONX Zip No. of Bldg-Wide MCI No. of Ovchge Indiv. Apt Code Bldgs Service Applic. Apts Complaints Service Complaints Complaints No. % No. % No. % No. % ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 10451 114 9 7.9 0 0.0 4,545 25 0.6 60 1.3 10452 285 11 3.9 2 0.7 13,757 60 0.4 71 0.5 10453 285 12 4.2 6 2.1 12,361 40 0.3 75 0.6 10454 94 0 0.0 1 1.1 1,273 4 0.3 5 0.4 10455 111 4 3.6 2 1.8 2,468 19 0.8 26 1.1 10456 271 8 3.0 8 3.0 8,402 40 0.5 53 0.6 10457 290 5 1.7 5 1.7 10,577 58 0.5 44 0.4 10458 601 19 3.2 16 2.7 16,662 106 0.6 98 0.6 10459 143 3 2.1 2 1.4 2,603 14 0.5 29 1.1 10460 163 3 1.8 5 3.1 4,516 26 0.6 18 0.4 10461 185 8 4.3 3 1.6 4,868 28 0.6 21 0.4 10462 369 11 3.0 48 13.0 10,860 47 0.4 101 0.9 10463 253 15 5.9 9 3.6 12,027 48 0.4 114 0.9 10464 13 1 7.7 0 0.0 142 3 2.1 2 1.4 10465 18 0 0.0 0 0.0 465 2 0.4 0 0.0 10466 171 3 1.8 5 2.9 4,274 22 0.5 21 0.5 10467 500 14 2.8 15 3.0 l8,477 91 0.5 122 0.7 10468 466 14 3.0 17 3.6 17,555 119 0.7 202 1.2 10469 66 7 10.6 1 1.5 696 6 0.9 18 2.6 10470 79 2 2.5 3 3.8 1,907 10 0.5 7 0.4 10471 87 5 5.7 2 2.3 3,727 12 0.3 8 0.2 10472 189 34 18.0 3 1.6 6,632 38 0.6 64 1.0 10473 5 0 0.0 0 0.0 504 1 0.2 1 0.2 10474 26 0 0.0 1 3.8 848 2 0.2 3 0.4 ================================================================================================ [Note: the following table is formatted for 100 columns] ================================================================================================ SELECTED APPLICATION AND COMPLAINT FILINGS BY ZIP CODE AND NUMBER OF APARTMENTS, REGISTERED BUILDINGS, 1993 NEW YORK Zip No. of Bldg-Wide MCI No. of Ovchge Indiv. Apt Code Bldgs Service Applic. Apts Complaints Service Complaints Complaints No. % No. % No. % No. % ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 10001 131 11 8.4 0 0.0 4,100 25 0.6 16 0.4 10002 501 4 0.8 9 1.8 6,858 38 0.6 36 0.5 10003 766 31 4.0 29 3.8 15,333 115 0.8 91 0.6 10009 574 20 3.5 124 21.6 15,765 93 0.6 45 0.3 10010 208 4 1.9 6 2.9 7,752 28 0.4 18 0.2 10011 725 21 2.9 15 2.1 12,201 75 0.6 93 0.8 10012 333 7 2.1 14 4.2 5,049 36 0.7 29 0.6 10013 240 5 2.1 6 2.5 2,511 10 0.4 17 0.7 10014 664 17 2.6 13 2.0 10,335 73 0.7 66 0.6 10016 481 26 5.4 13 2.7 15,551 68 0.4 81 0.5 10017 90 8 8.9 3 3.3 4,764 30 0.6 30 0.6 10018 58 1 1.7 2 3.4 1,181 4 0.3 3 0.3 10019 433 13 3.0 9 2.1 12,836 72 0.6 41 0.3 10021 1,210 30 2.5 28 2.3 29,674 99 0.3 117 0.4 10022 332 11 3.3 13 3.9 9,147 44 0.5 38 0.4 10023 808 23 2.8 11 1.4 18,322 87 0.5 78 0.4 10024 966 23 2.4 43 4.5 17,480 119 0.7 99 0.6 10025 784 33 4.2 21 2.7 20,402 127 0.6 144 0.7 10026 210 18 8.6 1 0.5 3,232 42 1.3 33 1.0 10027 349 23 6.6 8 2.3 5,798 42 0.7 125 2.2 10028 751 26 3.5 12 1.6 15,899 50 0.3 74 0.5 10029 352 20 5.7 1 0.3 4,659 27 0.6 37 0.8 10030 166 3 1.8 1 0.6 2,863 44 1.5 39 1.4 10031 495 30 6.1 13 2.6 10,028 144 1.4 160 1.6 10032 444 44 9.9 4 0.9 12,194 179 1.5 299 2.5 10033 444 12 2.7 13 2.9 13,843 91 0.7 157 1.1 10034 320 22 6.9 11 3.4 10,541 65 0.6 94 0.9 10035 124 4 3.2 1 0.8 1,528 20 1.3 19 1.2 10036 313 6 1.9 2 0.6 6,067 34 0.6 24 0.4 10037 54 4 7.4 0 0.0 5,094 8 0.2 37 0.7 10038 27 0 0.0 1 3.7 468 1 0.2 0 0.0 10039 64 3 4.7 0 0.0 1,804 24 1.3 20 1.1 10040 295 11 3.7 3 1.0 11,866 90 0.8 83 0.7 10128 639 15 2.3 12 1.9 13,104 26 0.2 76 0.6 ================================================================================================ [Note: the following table is formatted for 100 columns] ================================================================================================ SELECTED APPLICATION AND COMPLAINT FILINGS BY ZIP CODE AND NUMBER OF APARTMENTS, REGISTERED BUILDINGS, 1993 BROOKLYN Zip No. of Bldg-Wide MCI No. of Ovchge Indiv. Apt Code Bldgs Service Applic. Apts Complaints Service Complaints Complaints No. % No. % No. % No. % ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 11201 457 6 1.3 6 1.3 5,981 31 0.5 40 0.7 11203 288 7 2.4 4 1.4 7,159 49 0.7 60 0.8 11204 281 12 4.3 15 5.3 5,142 28 0.5 50 1.0 11205 170 4 2.4 5 2.9 2,152 17 0.8 34 1.6 11206 275 3 1.1 3 1.1 2,485 15 0.6 17 0.7 11207 225 2 0.9 0 0.0 2,276 9 0.4 17 0.7 11208 161 3 1.9 2 1.2 2,294 25 1.1 22 1.0 11209 562 4 0.7 13 2.3 11,356 29 0.3 44 0.4 11210 191 3 1.6 6 3.1 7,021 21 0.3 36 0.5 11211 534 2 0.4 1 0.2 5,417 37 0.7 20 0.4 11212 173 18 10.4 5 2.9 4,648 27 0.6 28 0.6 11213 347 15 4.3 9 2.6 7,690 86 1.1 151 2.0 11214 467 20 4.3 19 4.1 8,716 26 0.3 87 1.0 11215 830 16 1.9 25 3.0 6,500 72 1.1 61 0.9 11216 501 16 3.2 3 0.6 5,135 62 1.2 62 1.2 11217 343 7 2.0 2 0.6 2,805 23 0.8 19 0.7 11218 315 7 2.2 5 1.6 9,098 32 0.4 45 0.5 11219 372 9 2.4 10 2.7 5,746 25 0.4 34 0.6 11220 712 7 1.0 10 1.4 6,464 41 0.6 41 0.6 11221 331 6 1.8 2 0.6 2,863 27 0.9 22 0.8 11222 780 6 0.8 18 2.3 4,861 39 0.8 34 0.7 11223 227 1 0.4 5 2.2 6,306 16 0.3 22 0.3 11224 50 6 12.0 0 0.0 1,356 5 0.4 5 0.4 11225 344 29 8.4 6 1.7 12,711 103 0.8 161 1.3 11226 696 24 3.4 19 2.7 24,168 163 0.7 245 1.0 11228 64 1 1.6 1 1.6 911 1 0.1 2 0.2 11229 226 4 1.8 14 6.2 8,098 22 0.3 41 0.5 11230 384 12 3.1 22 5.7 12,818 45 0.4 62 0.5 11231 173 1 0.6 2 1.2 1,294 9 0.7 12 0.9 11232 196 7 3.6 7 3.6 2,256 20 0.9 17 0.8 11233 311 9 2.9 8 2.6 3,014 23 0.8 35 1.2 11234 31 0 0.0 1 3.2 1,312 2 0.2 9 0.7 11235 308 7 2.3 14 4.5 10,567 31 0.3 51 0.5 11236 26 2 7.7 1 3.8 652 3 0.5 11 1.7 11237 961 3 0.3 5 0.5 5,770 43 0.7 22 0.4 11238 472 7 1.5 9 1.9 6,435 55 0.9 59 0.9 ================================================================================================ [Note: the following table is formatted for 100 columns] ================================================================================================ SELECTED APPLICATION AND COMPLAINT FILINGS BY ZIP CODE AND NUMBER OF APARTMENTS, REGISTERED BUILDINGS, 1993 QUEENS Zip No. of Bldg-Wide MCI No. of Ovchge Indiv. Apt Code Bldgs Service Applic. Apts Complaints Service Complaints Complaints No. % No. % No. % No. % ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 11004 51 8 15.7 0 0.0 879 6 0.7 38 4.3 11101 222 3 1.4 8 3.6 2,445 20 0.8 17 0.7 11102 360 5 1.4 4 1.1 4,128 24 0.6 27 0.7 11103 631 13 2.1 11 1.7 5,765 24 0.4 30 0.5 11104 323 6 1.9 9 2.8 6,530 23 0.4 46 0.7 11105 288 17 5.9 9 3.1 3,695 6 0.2 12 0.3 11106 484 11 2.3 20 4.1 6,700 22 0.3 47 0.7 11354 178 15 8.4 4 2.2 5,452 23 0.4 44 0.8 11355 212 16 7.5 16 7.5 11,299 43 0.4 77 0.7 11356 23 0 0.0 2 8.7 120 2 1.7 0 0.0 11357 80 0 0.0 0 0.0 758 0 0.0 5 0.7 11358 158 2 1.3 1 0.6 1,601 0 0.0 8 0.5 11360 18 6 33.3 0 0.0 887 0 0.0 19 2.1 11361 116 7 6.0 0 0.0 1,676 10 0.6 25 1.5 l1363 12 0 0.0 0 0.0 314 0 0.0 1 0.3 11364 737 3 0.4 0 0.0 2,010 9 0.4 14 0.7 11365 304 0 0.0 0 0.0 3,512 8 0.2 1 0.0 l1366 37 0 0.0 0 0.0 254 1 0.4 2 0.8 l1367 250 11 4.4 3 1.2 3,025 59 2.0 212 7.0 11368 185 64 34.6 6 3.2 7,286 18 0.2 128 1.8 11369 25 1 4.0 1 4.0 593 6 1.0 12 2.0 11370 160 0 0.0 1 0.6 489 1 0.2 4 0.8 11372 342 9 2.6 12 3.5 11,222 46 0.4 45 0.4 11373 300 11 3.7 19 6.3 10,307 36 0.3 72 0.7 l1374 176 7 4.0 15 8.5 8,748 13 0.1 49 0.6 11375 292 17 5.8 21 7.2 11,920 34 0.3 56 0.5 11377 548 8 1.5 19 3.5 9,789 23 0.2 56 0.6 11378 23 0 0.0 2 8.7 224 0 0.0 1 0.4 11379 27 0 0.0 0 0.0 746 3 0.4 0 0.0 11385 1,154 12 1.0 33 2.9 7,167 49 0.7 40 0.6 11411 14 0 0.0 0 0.0 28 0 0.0 0 0.0 11413 8 0 0.0 0 0.0 146 0 0.0 0 0.0 11414 18 0 0.0 1 5.6 340 2 0.6 0 0.0 11415 100 7 7.0 4 4.0 3,918 15 0.4 33 0.8 11416 15 1 6.7 0 0.0 149 2 1.3 1 0.7 11417 57 0 0.0 1 1.8 297 0 0.0 2 0.7 11418 75 2 2.7 2 2.7 1,559 11 0.7 12 0.8 11419 24 2 8.3 0 0.0 377 7 1.9 8 2.1 11420 8 0 0.0 0 0.0 170 0 0.0 3 1.8 11421 33 3 9.1 1 3.0 886 1 0.1 5 0.6 11423 103 18 17.5 0 0.0 1,599 20 1.3 57 3.6 11426 66 0 0.0 1 1.5 305 0 0.0 1 0.3 11427 88 5 5.7 2 2.3 1,638 29 1.8 11 0.7 11428 25 3 12.0 0 0.0 496 1 0.2 3 0.6 11432 131 16 12.2 7 5.3 6,948 40 0.6 51 0.7 11433 5 2 40.0 0 0.0 147 2 1.4 6 4.1 11434 8 0 0.0 0 0.0 586 1 0.2 0 0.0 11435 127 13 10.2 5 3.9 6,475 17 0.3 46 0.7 11691 108 4 3.7 6 5.6 4,199 13 0.3 19 0.5 11694 39 0 0.0 1 2.6 1,356 4 0.3 6 0.4 ================================================================================================ [Note: the following table is formatted for 100 columns] ================================================================================================ SELECTED APPLICATION AND COMPLAINT FILINGS BY ZIP CODE AND NUMBER OF APARTMENTS, REGISTERED BUILDINGS, 1993 RICHMOND Zip No. of Bldg-Wide MCI No. of Ovchge Indiv. Apt Code Bldgs Service Applic. Apts Complaints Service Complaints Complaints No. % No. % No. % No. % ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- 10301 170 l 0.6 4 2.4 2,684 7 0.3 18 0.7 10302 27 0 0.0 0 0.0 357 0 0.0 2 0.6 10304 29 l 3.4 0 0.0 427 l 0.2 5 1.2 10305 28 0 0.0 0 0.0 419 l 0.2 1 0.2 10306 21 0 0.0 0 0.0 594 l 0.2 3 0.5 10308 7 0 0.0 0 0.0 98 2 2.0 0 0.0 10310 24 0 0.0 0 0.0 262 l 0.4 l 0.4 10314 71 0 0.0 0 0.0 598 2 0.3 4 0.7 ================================================================================================