Facade Work Related to New Roof Installation

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes for building complex based on the installation of new roofs and related exterior restoration work. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed, claiming that the DRA ignored their engineer’s report, which found defects in landlord’s work. In addition, they claimed some of the work was merely cosmetic. They also argued that some tenants didn’t have terraces, so they shouldn't have to pay for this part of the work.

The DHCR ruled against tenants. The exterior work, including pointing, waterproofing, masonry, lintels, and steel replacement was done on or near the roof as part of the roof replacement, so it qualified as part of the MCI. The engineer’s report stated that there were cracks in the facades and window sills in some of the buildings. But total façade resurfacing wasn’t part of the MCI, only restoration work related to the roof installation. Landlord also wasn’t required to submit its own engineer’s report in response to the one submitted by tenants. Landlord also showed that it scheduled any needed repairs to the roof work and there was no proof of any roof leaks and no rent reduction orders issued for a reduction in services.

Lenox Terrace: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket Nos. SF410058RT et al. (11/14/08) [4-pg. doc.]