Prior Pointing and Waterproofing Was Part of Project Whose Useful Life Hadn't Expired

Landlord applied for MCI rent hikes based on pointing and building facade work. The DRA ruled against landlord, who appealed and lost. The DRA found that a prior MCI rent hike was granted in 2001 for exterior restoration work and that improvement hadn't yet exhausted its useful life before landlord filed its new MCI application. Landlord argued that the DRA failed to differentiate between pointing/waterproofing and facade work. But landlord had applied for pointing and facade restoration as a single MCI item.

The work contract showed that the work done was exterior masonry/waterproofing that included brick pointing/masonry waterproofing, cement coating on parapet wall and under gutter, coping stone work, and window capping and lintels caulking as integral parts of exterior restoration work. A comprehensive building-wide exterior restoration was supposed to include all necessary pointing, waterproofing, and masonry work so that, when completed, the premises would remain free from water seepage for a reasonable period of time. An MCI increase granted for such work contemplates a 25-year useful life with the work remaining structurally sound and watertight. Here, the pointing and waterproofing done in 2001 wasn't performed as an independent MCI item but was included as an integral part of exterior restoration work. Landlord therefore couldn't claim a 15-year useful life requirement for the prior work. Landlord also didn't submit a waiver request before commencing the new work.

BSF Inwood Holding LLC: DHCR Adm. Rev. Docket No. IX410010RO (10/21/22)[3-pg. document]