Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Web Site:

Transcription

1

2

3 # State of New York Docket Number: Division of Housing and Community Renewal ~~. ;fl' Office of Rent Administration ~:f ~. '_.~.",-- Web Site: Supplemental Signature and Affirmation This form is a supplement to the application for a rent reduction based upon decreased building-wide service(s). Address of Housing Accommodation: Number and 188 E 93rd Street New York, NY Zip Code: Street: City: Ifyou have Tenant Representatives, provide the information requested in this box: Name Address Phone No. Cassie Carter 188 E 93rd Street#1N, New York, NY Bus. ( ) Res. (212) Bus. ( ) Res. ( ) If you are joining in this complaint, please sign and print your name in the space provided below and indicate your apartment number. You must also indicate the status of your apartment by checking the appropriate box in the right-hand column; either "RS" ifyour apartment is rent-stabilized, or "RC" ifyour apartment is rent-controlled. If you require more space, use the reverse ofthis form and additional forms as needed I have read the attached complaint, affirm the contents to be true of my own knowledge, sign my name, and join in the stated request for relief. I agree to be bound by the actions ofthe tenant representative(s) named on this form during these proceedings. Name (please print clearly) Cassie Carter Signature Apt. No. Status RS RC C~~ C~ [Z] D (J;./~/fY{ ~k D Randolph Lockard 11 Gilda Giordano ;;,r~~ 18 [l] D Pauline Winans 10 [l] D Monique Rivera 2A [Z] D ( ~ Ij Gregory Murphy 28 CZJ!~ ltla, r..~_ Vo«[l] D,~ LJ-.I.~iJ.{;".7f [Z] D Ludovica Villar-Hauser 28.tr I?" Vincent Appow.J/-:j;7 /) «,/,~; )/.( / 7~~(~ D Terry Doktor 3J [l] 2N [l] D Louise Doktor /~ V. 3J A' A' L. A-,~l~~ [l] D N' ~ V- ( /" <:1. II k---- lzl D >..- ~.~~. VJ1(, J!Yj~~ CZJ D D D 0 D Jennifer Misner 40 Thomas H. Williams 21 RA-84.1 (4197) Internet Page_l_ of --

4 8 November 2008 Sent via Certified ail Benjamin Ohebshalom alkla Ben Shalom Receipt # Sky Management Corp. 226 E 54 th Street, Suite 402 New York, NY Mr. Ohebshalom: This letter is to inform you that the ventilation, lighting, and heating ofthe existing tenement buildings' lobbies, hallways and stairs have been severely reduced/eliminated, and a substantial portion of the lobby area has been eliminated. We also wish to notify you that the cellar garbage room is not comparable to the eliminated courtyard trash disposal area. Please restore these services. Cassie Carter Randolph Lockard Gilda Giordano Pauline Winans #1N #11 #18 #10 Monique Rivera #2A Gregory Murphy #28 Ludovica Villar-Hauser Vincent Appow #2B #2N Thomas H. Williams #21 Terry Doktor #3J Louise Doktor #3J Jennifer Misner #40

5 rl o o rl o C' Certified Fee Retum ReceIpt Fee (Encforoomenl RequIred) Reslrtc:ted Delivery Fee 1---"';'::'':''::':::'''';'-1. (Endorsement ReqUired) t---..;..:.~~...:...i Total Postage & Fee!! L;$f blZ.._J 1~~~~<1J SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete Item 4 If RestriCted Delivery 'is desired. Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: BeI1jd1V) VI 011& b.jhtj)vl1'j st-y maljt:t~ YlU<1 +, 2 2~ E 5-4 M St.) STe. [/ol /Jti,V York, )J Y)(JO 2. Article Number -? :-1 (T"ransfer from service label) I ()O I 3. Se cetype Certified Mall q Registered o Insured Mall 0 Express Mail 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) 0 Yes PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt Q2-M-1540

6 Cassie Carter 188 E 93 rd Street New York, NY Sent via Certified Mail Receipt # State of New York Division of Housing and Community Renewal Office of Rent Administration Gertz Plaza Union Hall Street Jamaica, NY November 2008 Administrator: This complaint is being filed on behalf of myself and the tenants of apartments 1I, 1O, 1B, 2A, 2B, 2I, 2N, 3J, and 4O. Form RA-84.1 is attached. The owner of 188 E 93 rd Street has eliminated all windows and doors providing light and ventilation to the lobbies, hallways, and stairs of the tenements. In addition, the owner reduced the area of the lobbies by more than 1/3, replacing the area with hallways, and eliminated previously supplied heat in the lobbies, hallways, and stairs. Furthermore, the owner relocated the garbage disposal area from the outdoor street-level courtyard to the cellar, thereby subjecting tenants to hazardous conditions. Tenants ask DHCR to order restoration of the previously provided services. Background In 2005, the owner eliminated the courtyard at 188 E 93 rd Street in order to increase the commercial rent roll by constructing a horizontal enlargement. In March 2007, tenants filed a Complaint of Reduced Building-Wide Services (Docket #VC B) objecting to the elimination of the courtyard. DHCR granted the tenants complaint and ordered a rent reduction. DHCR denied the owner s PAR (Docket # VK RO). The owner then filed an Article 78 petition (Index #108059/2008), currently pending. The owner s Application for Permission to Change or Decrease Dwelling Space (Docket #VK OD) was approved in September 2008: DHCR granted the owner permission to eliminate the courtyard and ordered a 10% rent reduction. In October 2008, the owner 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 1 of 11

7 filed a PAR objecting to the 10% rent reduction (Docket #WJ RO); this docket is currently pending, tenants having filed an objection. Also in October 2008, tenants filed a PAR (Docket # WJ RT) asserting that the decision granting the owner permission to eliminate the courtyard in Docket #VK OD did not consider evidence submitted by the tenants and was based upon false information supplied by the owner. Throughout the preceding processes, tenants have argued that the courtyard provided statutorily required lighting and ventilation of the common areas of the buildings, the only available safe and sanitary place to dispose of garbage and recycling, and tenant access to outdoor space. DHCR s decisions thus far have acknowledged the courtyard space itself as a required service and recognized its elimination as a reduction of required services. However, DHCR has remained silent as to service reductions that arose as consequences of the elimination of the courtyard, which include the elimination or reduction of previously provided lighting, ventilation, heat, garbage disposal, and lobby space. Therefore, we ask DHCR to assess these service reductions on their own merit and order the services to be restored. We hope DHCR will bear in mind, in reviewing our complaint, that the buildings comprising 188 E 93 rd Street are Old Law tenements, constructed in 1875, and are subject to special provisions of the Multiple Dwelling Law and NYC Building Code. These special provisions represent the barest minimum requirements for habitability, as it is impossible for tenements to meet even the lowest standards applied to modern buildings. The service reductions we are complaining of are serious impairments to the Warranty of Habitability and must be corrected. Lighting and Ventilation of Lobbies, Hallways, and Stairs The Multiple Dwelling Law mentions ventilation and its variants 119 times, and light 202 times. Lighting and ventilation are primary habitability issues in multiple dwellings. For more than a century, housing codes have recognized lighting and ventilation as the most serious deficiencies of tenement buildings. 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 2 of 11

8 188 E 93 rd Street is an Old Law tenement that failed to meet the most rudimentary requirements for light and ventilation when it was built in In 2005, the owner of 188 E 93 rd Street reduced the building even farther below substandard conditions by eliminating all windows and doors providing light and ventilation to the lobbies, hallways, and stairs of the tenements, worsening an existing deficiency. Tenants ask DHCR to order the restoration of natural light and ventilation. For context, Exhibit 1 shows exterior photos of 188 E 93 rd Street taken from the street. Exhibit 2 shows the approximate layout of the second, third, fourth, and fifth stories in the three buildings, indicating that the stairwells and hallways are centrally located. All three buildings have street-level entrances opening into the area labeled as Tunnel Hallway and Horizontal Enlargement ; this area previously contained the courtyard and is now enclosed. A physical inspection will verify that, except for the 188 E 93 rd Street lobby entrance door and roof access doors required by law to be kept closed, there are no windows or doors opening to the outer air in the tenement hallways on any floor. When the tenement buildings comprising 188 E 93 rd Street were built in1875, they were already in violation of the first Tenement House Act of 1867, which required: The halls on each floor shall open directly to the external air with suitable windows, and shall have no room or other obstruction at the end, unless sufficient light or ventilation is otherwise provided for said halls, in a manner approved by the Metropolitan Board of Health. The buildings lacked the required hallway windows. The buildings continued in violation when the law was amended in 1887 to prohibit a multiple dwelling from being used, occupied, leased or rented for a tenement or lodging-house without the required hallway windows. In 1902, the City conducted inspections of tenements in an effort to enforce compliance with tenement reforms. These inspections were recorded on I-Cards. Exhibit 3 contains I-Cards for 1656 Third Avenue (A-D apartments, Exhibit 3a) and 1660 Third 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 3 of 11

9 Avenue (I-L apartments, Exhibit 3b); the buildings did not pass inspection. The I- Cards verify that there were no windows in the hallways opening to the outer air in Early tenement laws also required skylights in stair bulkheads to provide light and ventilation (a requirement continued in MDL 217). The three tenements comprising 188 E 93 rd Street had bulkhead skylights. According to the I-Cards, inspectors found the light and ventilation provided by the skylights inadequate in The skylights as they appear today are shown in Exhibit 4. The current skylight in 1656 Third Avenue s bulkhead (Exhibit 4c) appears to be of the same type as would have existed in 1902, based on comparison with the nearly identical tenement skylights shown in a 1900 photo from the National Archives (Exhibit 5); it does not appear the skylight has been improved. At some time after the 1902 inspections, windows were added to the bulkheads. All but one of these windows in the three buildings were later sealed over, as shown in Exhibit 6. Physical inspection will confirm the inadequacy of light and ventilation provided from the bulkheads. The I-Cards indicate no other sources of light or ventilation of the hallways and stairs, beyond the inadequate skylights, as of Until sometime mid-twentieth century, the residential entrances were on Third Avenue, and the I-Cards do not indicate whether these entrance doors had windows of any sort. Likewise, there were always doors opening to the rear courtyard (doors would have been necessary for tenants to access the outdoor latrines that existed as of 1902), but we do not know if these entrance doors had windows to provide light and ventilation of the hallways and stairs. We do know that, as of 1929, Multiple Dwelling Law Sec. 35 required that every door giving access to an entrance hall from outside the dwelling shall contain at least five square feet of glazed surface. It is reasonable to assume glazed windows may have existed in the street-level entrances as early as E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 4 of 11

10 Exhibit 7 shows photos taken of the courtyard entrances in 2004 and As can be seen, the top halves of all of these doors contained large glazed windows. The courtyard entrance to 1660 Third Avenue (Exhibit 7a) had double doors containing two glazed windows. The entrances of 1656 and 1658 Third Avenue (Exhibit 7b) each had three glazed panes plus smaller glazed panes on either side of each door (Exhibit 7c). Exhibit 8 shows the same entrances, here looking from the lobbies into the courtyard. These photos show that the glazed windows afforded ample natural light, and that the doors opened to the courtyard to provide natural ventilation. Physical inspection will verify that the owner has eliminated all of these doors and windows. For context, Exhibit 9 shows the three entrances in 2005, during construction of the horizontal enlargement that eliminated the courtyard. Exhibit 10 shows the three entrances as they are today. All three entrances have been enclosed inside a tunnel hallway. The courtyard entrance doors to 1660 Third Avenue have been removed entirely (Exhibit 10a). The wooden doors and glazed windows in and around the entrances to 1656 and 1658 Third Avenue have been replaced by metal doors containing windows each measuring one square foot, placed above eye-level (Exhibits 10b and 10c). The new windows look out into the enclosed tunnel hallway and provide no natural light or ventilation. When the photo of the current lobby of 1656 Third Avenue in Exhibit 11d was taken, the lobby light was burnt out; the small window in the door admitted almost no light. The lobby was so dark it was almost impossible to get a photo of the area. Although the owner installed skylights in the tunnel hallway, these skylights provide no light or ventilation to the tenement buildings. To summarize, lighting and ventilation of the lobbies, hallways, and stairs were inadequate when the buildings were constructed. The owner has worsened the deficiency by eliminating all of the doors and windows opening to the outer air. Tenants ask DHCR to order the restoration of natural light and ventilation. 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 5 of 11

11 Lobby Area In constructing the tunnel hallway that enclosed all of the courtyard entrance doors and eliminated light and ventilation, the owner also eliminated more than 1/3 of the lobby area in 1656 and 1658 Third Avenue. Exhibit 11 shows the building lobbies before and after the horizontal enlargement that eliminated the courtyard. Exhibits 11a and 11b are diagrams of the configurations of the lobbies before and after the tunnel hallway was built. (Note that the diagrams are not to scale and contain rough measurements.) Until 2005, the lobbies were L-shaped mirrors of each other and comprised a total of about 350 square feet (Exhibit 11a). For visualization purposes, Exhibits 7 and 8 suggest what the lobbies looked like (please note these photos were taken while demolition and construction were in progress; the sheds and plywood barriers were not normally present in the lobbies). Tenants held tenant meetings in these lobbies during inclement weather before the courtyard was eliminated; all tenant meetings were held in the lobbies after the courtyard was eliminated. Now there is no area on the property large enough for tenants to assemble. As illustrated in Exhibit 11b, the owner eliminated more than 1/3 of the lobby space, including about 60 square feet in 1658 Third Avenue and about 61 square feet in 1656 Third Avenue. Exhibit 10c shows that the metal door the owner installed in 1658 Third Avenue is positioned inside the original lobby area, approximately 7 10 east of the location of the original door. Exhibit 10d shows the metal door the owner installed in 1656 Third Avenue is likewise positioned inside the lobby area, approximately 4 east of the location of the original door, and that the lobby has been narrowed drastically. The owner extended the commercial space more than 4 into the lobby area, replacing the 90 wide entryway with a 44 hallway. On the tunnel hallway side of the new metal door, the owner angled the wall, creating a mazelike entrance. The owner replaced the eliminated lobby space with labyrinthine hallways that can only be used for ingress and egress. There is no longer any space on the property large enough for tenants of 46 apartments to hold tenant meetings. All areas in which tenants 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 6 of 11

12 were previously able to congregate have been eliminated. Tenants ask DHCR to order the restoration of the lobby space. Hallway Heat In the course of reducing the size of the lobbies in 1656 and 1658 Third Avenue, the owner also eliminated heat in the lobbies, stairs, and hallways of these buildings. Previously, each of these buildings had a steam radiator in the lobby that provided heat to the lobby, stairs, and hallways, as shown in Exhibits 11a. In 1656 Third Avenue, the owner removed the radiator to accommodate expansion of the commercial space. In 1658 Third Avenue, the radiator was left in place. However, as shown in Exhibits 11b and 10c, the radiator is on the tunnel hallway side of the metal doors and therefore provides heat only to the tunnel hallway, and not to the tenement. Physical inspection will verify that no heat is provided to the lobbies, stairs, and hallways of 1656 and 1658 Third Avenue. Tenants ask DHCR to order restoration of heat. Garbage Disposal Prior to elimination of the courtyard in 2005, tenants disposed of their garbage and recycling in the street-level courtyard (see Exhibit 7a). Since July 2006, tenants have been forced to dispose of their garbage and recycling in a new garbage room in the cellar of 1658 Third Avenue. This change represents a severe decrease in services not only because it is inconvenient but more significantly because it is patently dangerous. Tenants ask DHCR to order immediate restoration of outdoor trash disposal. The garbage room is inconvenient. It is out of the way for everyone. Previously, tenants were able to simply drop off their trash and recycling in the courtyard on their way to the street. Now taking out the garbage requires a special trip to the cellar. 188 E 93 rd Street is a five-story walkup, and taking out the garbage now requires tenants to go up and down an additional flight of stairs on a regular basis. In real estate, extra flights 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 7 of 11

13 of stairs are not considered amenities in walkup apartment buildings. All of us rented our apartments with the street elevation as the basis for assessing the number of stairs that we would be required to climb every day. None of us counted on an additional flight of stairs, and this consideration alone shows the new garbage room to be a reduction of previously provided services. But inconvenience is the smallest problem. Until the owner issued a notice in July 2006 requiring tenants to dispose of garbage and recycling in the cellar (Exhibit 12a), tenants were prohibited from entering the cellar, as even the owner acknowledged (Exhibit 12b). The cellar is dangerous. The cellar demonstrates the worst of the substandard conditions to be found in a tenement building, and the owner s decision to subject tenants to these conditions on a daily basis is more rightly called abuse than reduction of services. The lobby entrance to the cellar is a hazard. As shown in Exhibit 13a, there is no landing at the top of the cellar stairs. The self-closing cellar door sits at the edge of the top stair, posing the constant threat of swinging shut and pushing a tenant down the stairs. The stairs themselves, shown in Exhibits 13b and 13c, are extremely steep, and they are only 26 wide at the top. Tenants must carry their garbage in front of them because the stairwell is not wide enough to accommodate more than the width of an average-sized person, and too steep for a bag to be carried behind. The handrail, meanwhile, has been the subject of an ongoing battle. The owner has installed flammable, 1 1/2 rods in two sections in lieu of a legal, continuous handrail. Among other problems, these rods are not strong enough to serve the intended purpose and tenants who require the support of a handrail are unable to descend the stairs at all. In addition, headroom near the bottom of the stairs is dangerously inadequate; at approximately 6, it poses a hazard to tenants. Physical inspection will verify the existence of these dangers. Previously, tenants were able to look through the lobby doors into the courtyard to assess what and who was there before disposing of garbage (see Exhibits 7 and 8). This was important to tenants for the same reason that mirrors are required in elevators 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 8 of 11

14 and peepholes are required in apartment doors: to protect people from being harmed by concealed assailants. Tenants no longer have this protection when disposing of garbage. At the foot of the cellar stairs is a metal door that is required by law to be kept shut. This door prevents tenants from seeing into the garbage room. With delivery persons and others constantly coming and going in the buildings, and with tenants too often indiscriminately buzzing in people they do not know, there is a constant risk that an attacker could be lurking in the garbage room. Such attacks are reported almost daily in the news, and on numerous occasions tenants have encountered homeless people and drunks in the buildings lobbies and hallways. The threat is very real. Tenants should not be forced to confront such danger just to take out their trash. The garbage room itself presents so many hazards it is hardly possible to list all of them. To begin, once a tenant is inside the garbage room, there is only one way out: back up the 26 wide stairs. Not only is the sidewalk vault padlocked from the outside (Exhibit 14a), the garbage room is enclosed by partitions and a padlocked door with no doorknob (Exhibit 14b) that bar access to the sidewalk vault. Also, tenants are at risk of being trapped in the dark, as the lights may be switched off from the top of the stairs (see Exhibit 13a). There is no ventilation or drainage in the garbage room, so the stench is often intolerable, especially when combined with the powerful odor of the building s waste trap (Exhibit 15) just on the other side of the padlocked door. But these problems pale in comparison with the fire hazards. It is illegal to store combustible materials in the cellar of a tenement. The garbage and recycling currently being stored in the cellar garbage room are combustible (Exhibit 16a), as are the painting and construction supplies the owner stores in the padlocked area at the back of the cellar (Exhibit 16b). Fireproofing efforts completed in the early twentieth century are showing considerable wear, with multiple tears in the metal sheeting covering the ceiling (Exhibit 16c), and there are of course no sprinklers. Fire is an imminent threat above all because of the restaurant occupying 1660 and 1658 Third Avenue. A thin partition, which is not fireproof, separates the garbage room from 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 9 of 11

15 the cellar area used by the restaurant. An unenclosed stair leads from the restaurant s kitchen to the cellar (Exhibit 16d). The restaurant has also cut openings in the party wall between 1658 and 1660 Third Avenue in both the ground floor and cellar. A fire in the restaurant s kitchen would spread unimpeded down the unenclosed stair to the cellar of 1658 Third Avenue, into the garbage room, and into the cellar of 1660 Third Avenue. Under no circumstance should any tenant be required to enter the cellar; in fact, the cellar entrance should be sealed off. Tenants urgently ask DHCR to order immediate restoration of outdoor garbage disposal. Modifications the owner has made to 188 E 93 rd Street have nearly undone more than 100 years of tenement reform. The owner has eliminated light, ventilation, and heat in the lobbies, hallways, and stairs; eliminated all spaces tenants were previously able to use for tenant meetings, including reducing the area of the lobbies by more than 1/3; and subjected tenants to hazardous conditions in the cellar garbage room. Tenants implore DHCR to order restoration of the previously provided services. Thank you for you time and thoughtful consideration of our complaint. Sincerely, Cassie Carter, Tenant Association Secretary Exhibits attached Cc: Jon Wallach, DHCR Shalom Tenants Alliance 188 E 93 rd Street Building-Wide Services Page 10 of 11