MCI Increase Granted for Exterior Restoration Work

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on exterior restoration work at its building. The DRA ruled for landlord. Tenants appealed and lost. They claimed that the exterior restoration work was unnecessary because the building's brick work in 2019 had no signs of damage. They also objected to the inclusion of asbestos work in the MCI increase granted. The DHCR noted the agency's established position that a building-wide comprehensive exterior restoration, that may include pointing, waterproofing, masonry, parapets, lintels, cornices, etc., constituted an MCI. Landlord properly substantiated its application with submission of required supporting documentation, including contracts, contractors' affirmations, cancelled checks showing payment, and proof of the scope of the work done that included an architect's diagram. The useful life of any previous work wasn't a factor to be considered here since there was no record of a prior MCI rent increase for exterior restoration at the building. And, since the cost of asbestos removal included in the MCI increase was connected with, and directly related to the exterior restoration work, that portion of the MCI increase was proper.

Foti: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. KQ130018RT (12/20/23)[3-pg. document]