15-Year Useful Life of Roof Had Expired

January 27, 2016

LVT Number: #26753

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a new roof and facade restoration with related engineering costs. The DRA ruled for landlord in part but excluded certain unrelated work. Landlord and tenant both appealed and lost. The DRA properly excluded the cost of stairway repairs, painting of ornamental panels and cornices, chimney repair, and installation of air conditioner braces. These were ordinary repair and maintenance items that weren’t necessary or directly related to the MCIs.

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on a new roof and facade restoration with related engineering costs. The DRA ruled for landlord in part but excluded certain unrelated work. Landlord and tenant both appealed and lost. The DRA properly excluded the cost of stairway repairs, painting of ornamental panels and cornices, chimney repair, and installation of air conditioner braces. These were ordinary repair and maintenance items that weren’t necessary or directly related to the MCIs. Tenant claimed that the prior roof installation hadn’t exceeded its useful life.The prior roof installation was completed in 1985 and consisted of single-ply asphalt. This type of roofing had a 15-year useful life under DHCR rules. So the new roof, installed in 2004, qualified as an MCI.

 

 
Unger/Head: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. ZB430009RO, ZB430035RT (11/5/15) [2-pg. doc.]

Downloads

ZB430009RO.pdf853.28 KB

Topics

More like this