OF-THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART MUI, and DAVID NG, Tenants Petitioners, -against?- SASSAN MAHFAR, SINA MAHF AR, 102 NORFOLK LLC, SMA-EQUITIES IN C., DAVID MOUSSEZADEH, JEANETTE COLAIANNI, and OMER ZWICKEL, Landlord Respondents, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE, CITY. OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGENE OF THE CITY OF NEW Respondents. JEFF CALTABIANO, BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN i LEE, SHAHEDMIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY ORDER To SHOW CAUSE Premises: 102 Norfolk Street New York, NY 10002 . I as; Index No.3? 0 HP . . /2015 .PRESENT: HON .. - . Upon reading the annexed veri?ed Petition of the aboVe-named Tenants-Petitioners, veri?ed on the day of 2015, and good cause having been shown, IT IS ORDERED that Sassan Mahfar, Sina Mahfar, 102 Norfolk LLC, SMA Equities Inc., David Moussezadeh, Jeanette Colaianni and Omer Zwickel (?the the Department of Housing Preservation and Development of the City of New York A the Department Of Buildings of the City of New York and the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York appear before this Court, Part 1 thereof, to beheld in Room 1166 of the Courthouse at 111 Centre Street,'New York, New York on the "E?glhof 2015, at 9:30 am. or as soon thereafter as the parties or counsel can be heard, and show cause why an Order should not be made or entered: - (2) (3). (4) (5) DireCting the Landlord-Respondents to correct all-the violations of the HouSing Maintenance Code, the Building Code and Multiple Dwelling Law that exist in the Petitioners? apartments and the public areas of the building in a workmanlike manner using quali?ed contractors; - Directing the Landlord-Respondents to correct all the violations of the Housing Maintenance Code, the Building Code and Multiple Dwelling Law that are recorded during. the Course of this litigation in a workmanlike manner using quali?ed cOntractors; {Enj oining the Landlord-Respondents from conducting any and all demolition and/or constructiOn work in the apartments and com'rrion areas of the Building that poses a risk to the health and safety of the Petitioners and occupants including, but not limited to, demolition, drilling, and installation of drywall and painting, pending the resolution of this case; Ordering the Landlord-Respondents to proVide Petitioners with 2?47hours written notice when a utility service is to be interrupted and to provide, one-week notice in advance of major demolition work in any part of the Building which'includes, but is not limited to, gutting of fixtures and walls, jack hammering of plastered surfaces and any other time When dust contamination will occur; Ordering the Landlord-Respondents to provide adequate janitorial services throughout the building and outside areas that addresses the accumulation of dust and garbage that results from the aforementioned construction work; 2 (8) . (.9) Ordering Landlord-Respondents to abide by certain work safety practices during construction Work which shall include, but are not limited to, providing'HEPA air filters to occupied units; using HEPA air scrubbers in vacant apartments and. I apartments under construction; mopping, sweeping and dusting halls, stairs and. banisters after the is ?nished for the day; covering all doors with plastic. and ensuring work crews keep vacant apartment doors covered during .the?work day; Ordering Landlord-Respondents to provide PetitiOners with a legallyadequate Tenant ?ProteCtion Plan and a revised and more comprehensive Lead Mitigation Plan covering all work to be done at thePremises and to adhere. to said plans; Ordering apermanent injunction requiring Landlord-Respondents to cease engaging in harassment; Imposing civil penalties upon the Landlord-Respondents pursuant to Section 27- 2115 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York for failing to correct the outstanding violations of the Housing Maintenance Code and Multiple Dwelling Law in the subject premises within the time required by law and pursuant to Section 0f the Administrative'Code of the. City.? of New York for harassment; and i i I Providing such other and ?trther relief as may be just and proper, including costs and disbursements of this action and awarding attorneys? fees, as appropriate. A ministrative Code of City of New rk. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that service of copies of this order and the papers annexed hereto shall be made on or before the Pt or 2015, as follows: (1), 'On the ReSpondents Sassan Mahfar, Sina Mahfar, 102 Norfolk LLC, SMA Equities Inc., Jeanette Colaianni, David Moussezadeh and Omer Zwickel by ,3 Baku rm one-beware mm\ ,2015; Ifthe . Respondents are registered with the New York City Department of Housing PreserVation and Development or the Corporate Record of the New York Department of State, mailing may be made to the Respondent atthe addresses indicated in such registrations; (2) On HPD, by certi?ed mail, return receipt requested to its Housing Litigation Bureau (3) On DOB, by certi?ed mail, return receipt requested to its General'Counsel at (4) On DOHMH by certi?ed-mail, return-receipt requested to its of?ce Service in'the manner set forth herein shall be deemed good and suf?cient. . Dated: New York, New York . 33/! 3 pg ,2015 CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART JEFF CALTABIANO, BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN LEE, SHAHED MIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY Index No. MUI, and DAVID NG, HP /2015 Tenants Petitioners, AFFIRMATION OF IMIVIEDIATE URGENCY -against- SAS SAN MAI-IFAR, SINA MAHFAR, 102 Premises: NORFOLK LLC, SMA EQUITIES INC., DAVID 102 Norfolk Street MOUSSEZADEH, JEANETTE COLAIANNI, and New York, NY 10012 OMER ZWICKEL, Landlord? Respondents, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE - CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondents. RACHEL SPECTOR, ESQ., an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the Courts of the State of New York, hereby af?rms the following facts under penalty of perjury, except as to those matters stated upon information and belief. As to those matters, I believe them to be true based upon information provided to me by my clients, and a review of the ?les maintained within my of?ce. In addition to the facts, I hereby set forth the following propositions of law. 1. I I am of counsel to New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, 151 West 30th Street, 11th Floor, New York, New York 10001, co-counsel with Urban Justice Center for all Petitioners. As such, I am fully familiar with all the facts and circumstances of this case. 2. I make this a?irmation in support of Tenants-Petitioners? motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction, against Landlord-Respondents SASSAN MAI-IF AR, SINA MAHFAR, 102 NORFOLK LLC, SMA EQUITIES INC., JEANETTE COLAIANNI, OMER ZWICKEL and DAVID MOUSSEZADEH, enjoining Landlord- Respondents from conducting any demolition and/or construction work in the Building that poses a risk to the health and safety of the Petitioners and occupants including, but not limited to, demolition, drilling, installation of drywall and painting, pending the resolution of this case; and enjoining Respondents from engaging in any activities in violation of Section 27-2005 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. 3. Petitioners seek an end to the harassment they have faced ever since Landlord- Respondents purchased 102 Norfolk Street approximately one year ago and began to pressure rent-regulated tenants into leaving the Building. This harassment campaign has included a pattern of unsafe demolition and construction practices despite the presence of young children, pregnant mothers and elderly homebound residents in the Building, neglect of conditions and I decrease in services in Petitioners? apartments, and a refusal to accept Petitioners? right to remain inltheir homes. 4. Petitioners also seek an immediate order requiring Landlord-Respondents not to move forward with any further demolition or construction until an agreed-upon plan is in place to protect tenants? health and safety and Landlord-Respondents agree to comply with such a plan. The Court has granted such relief in another currently-pending case involving a building owned and managed by the same parties, and should ensure that the same high standard of protection is applied here given Landlord-Respondents? record of unsafe and negligent I construction work. 5. Preliminary relief is warranted because Petitioners reasonably fear that construction work could resume at any moment in the four apartments in the Building that are - currently vacant and not yet remodeled. In the past, such work has created dangerously high concentrations of lead dust throughout the building, which is particularly harm?ll to the young children residing in the building, including a six-year old and a 4-month old baby whose mother was pregnant during the worst of the demolition and construction thus far. Past-construction has also caused damage in neighboring apartments due to Landlord?Respondents? negligence. The Petitioners seek injunctive relief to prevent Landlord-Respondents ?om again creating a hazardous environment that will put their health at risk. See Affidavits of Petitioners attached as Exhibit A. . 6. Landlord?Respondents have exhibited a disturbing pattern of ignoring the health and safety of the building?s tenants, and have created the need for the Court to step in. Without immediate injunctive relief, the Petitioners are at grave risk of suffering irreparable harm. STATEMENT OF FACTS 7. The above-named Petitioners reside and are tenants at 102 Norfolk Street, New York, NY 10002 (the ?Building?). The Building is a multiple dwelling located in New York County, in the City and State of New York. 8. Petitioners occupy apartments in the Building as set forth in Exhibit A to the attached Veri?ed Petition. Upon information and belief, a majority and/or all of the Petitioners? apartments are rent-stabilized. 9. Upon information and belief, Respondents 102 NORFOLK LLC purchased the Building in March 2014. With a clear goal of renting as many units as possible at high market rates, Landlord-Respondents began seeking to encourage rent-regulated tenants to give up their affordable homes, in part by warning them that construction work was about to begin that would be very disruptive to them, particularly to elderly residents. 10. Landlord-Respondents also commenced hazardous and unsafe demolition work in the Building in early April 2014, throughout all common halls and stairwells as well as in several vacant apartments. This demolition began without any apparent attempts to mitigate residents? exposure to dust and/or potentially toxic construction debris. See generally Veri?ed Petition 111] 29-31.; 34-35. 11. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents? unsafe work practices have jeopardized Petitioners? health by exposing them to extremely high levels of lead, and have led to repeated violations from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH). The lead exposure is particularly worrisome for Petitioner Shahed Miah, who resides with his three children, one of whom was under the age of six during the ongoing construction and demolition, and with his wife, who was pregnant with a fourth child throughout the period of high lead exposure. See generally Veri?ed Petition 37-44; Af?davit of Shahed Miah, attached as Exhibit A. I 12. Upon information and belief, despite repeated ?ndings of unlawful lead contamination in construction dust and debris located in the public areas of the Building, Landlord?Respondents never noti?ed Petitioners or other tenants about the results of these lead tests, or took adequate steps to mitigate lead exposure or clean dust and debris that remained throughout the common areas of the building. See generally Veri?ed Petition 111] 45-47. 13. Upon information and belief, while dedicating resources to the vacant apartments, Landlord-Respondents have ignored serious housing code Violations in the-common areas and in Petitioners? apartments. As of April-14, 2015 a total of 35 open violations are recorded by HPD. The HPD violation list is annexed as Exhibit to the Veri?ed Petition. 14. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents? pattern of conducting illegal demolition and construction work in the building amounts to a campaign of harassment in order to make the Building so uncomfortable and unsafe that tenants will vacate their rent-stabilized apartments. Landlord-Respondents? harassment of Petitioners is consistent with similar behavior that Landlord?Respondents have exhibited at other properties under their ownership, including but not limited to 210 Rivington Street, New York, NY 10002, 22 Spring Street, New York, NY 10012 and 113 Stanton Street, New York, NY 10012. 15 . Upon information and belief, tenants in other buildings owned and managed by Landlord-Respondents have reported that they received tenant protection and lead mitigation plans, but that construction work in those buildings consistently has failed to comply with those directives. Instead, tenants report that even when protection plans are in place and initially followed, by the second day of demolition and construction workers have once again resumed unsafe practices that fail to mitigate residents? exposure to contaminated dust and puts tenants? health at risk. See Alarcon v. Mahfar, Index No. 401/2015 (N .Y. County), Veri?ed Petition 3 1-32. 16. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents intend to do further demolition and construction work in the four currently vacant unrenovated apartments and in common areas of the Building. Therefore, Petitioners are very concerned that Landlord- Respondents Will proceed with ongoing and future work without mitigation plans in place and/or adherence to those plans. See Af?davits of Cherry Mui, Shah Miah and David Ng, attached as Exhibit A. THIS COURT SHOULD GRANT THE PRELIMINARY RELIEF REQUESTED BY PETITIONERS The Relief Sought Bv Petitioners 17. To obtain injunctive relief, Petitioners must show that they haVe a likelihood of prevailing in this proceeding, that they will be irreparany harmed if the relief is not granted, and that the equities are balanced in their favor. CPLR 6301; W.T. Grant Co. V. Srogi, 52 496, 438 761 (1981). As explained below, Petitioners satisfy all of the above criteria. 18. Petitioners seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to prevent further dangerous construction by their landlord, pursuant to Section of the Administrative Code of the City of New York including but not limited to enjoining any and all demolition and construction work in the building that poses a risk to the health and safety of the Petitioners and occupants, pending the resolution of this case; and enjoining Landlord- Respondents from engaging in any activities in violation of Section 27-2005 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. 19. The enforcement of minimum housing standards is necessary to protect the welfare of the pe0ple of New York City. NYC. Adm. Code 27-2002. al? Prometheus Realtv Corn. et al. v. Citv of New York, 80 206, 212, 911 299 (lst Dep?t 2010) (noting, in reference to Administrative Code 27-2002, that ?the legislative declaration in the Housing Maintenance Code indicates an intent to protect tenants' actual occupancy, as well as the physical condition of the premises, in that it explicitly declares a need to protect tenants in areas of ?health and safety, ?re protection, light and ventilation, cleanliness, repair and maintenance, and occupancy in dwellings? . . . [emphasis The duties and responsibilities imposed on both owners and the City of New York are enforceable by a range of legal, equitable, and administrative powers. 20. The Housing Court has broad discretion and authority to issue preliminary injunctions on behalf of tenants in Housing Part proceedings as may encourage the preservation of housing. New York City Civil Court Act Art. 1 110(a)(4). Without regard to the relief originally sought, the Court may ?employ any remedy, program, procedure or sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of housing standards, if it believes they will be more effective to accomplish compliance or to protect and promote the public interest. . . CCA Art. 1 110(c). Thus, this Court has ample authority to grant Petitioners injunctive relief that will prevent further danger to their health and safety. 21. . The authority to issue injunctions is not limited to orders to correct conditions needing repair. Prometheus, 80 at 212 (in holding that the Housing Part has equitable jurisdiction to protect residential tenants from harassment by their landlords, the court noted that CCA 110(a)(4) ?authorizes the Housing Part to issue equitable relief such as restraining orders and injunctions in order to enforce ?houSing standards?? and that this power is not restricted to causes of action involving the physical conditions of buildings). I 22. Furthermore, because Petitioners easily satisfy the requirements for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction pursuant. to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6301, 6311, and 6313, this COurt should grant the requested relief here. Petitioners Have a Stropg Likelihood of Success on the Merits 23. In order to justify preliminary relief, Petitioners need not establish a certainty of success on their claims, but need only make aprimafacie showing of their likelihood of success. McLaughlin Piven, Vogel Inc. v. W.J. Nolan Co., 114 165, 498 146 (2nd Dep?t 1986); Tucker V. Toia, 54 322, 388 475 (4th Dep?t 1976). 24. The New York City Administrative Code and the Rules of the City of New York have detailed lead-safe work requirements for construction residential housing. The requirements apply to all multiple dwelling buildings constructed before 1960, including the Building. There are speci?c procedures required for job site preparation, work methods, and daily clean up. NYC Admin. Code 17-181, 27-2056.11 (and .5, .16, 24 RCNY 173.14; 28 RCNY Chapter 11. Landlord-Respondents have failed to conduct construction work in compliance with those procedures. Additionally, there are similar but even stronger federal regulations for lead-safe work requirements in residential housing with which Landlord- Respondents' are not complying. 15 USC 2682, 2686; TSCA 402(c)(3); 40 CFR Part 745 Subparts E, F. 25. For example, debris in the work area and adjoining areas must be HEPA vacuumed or wet swept and disposed of in sealed plastic bags every day during construction. 28 RCNY Chapter 11 06(g)(ix). However, upon information and belief, construction workers have failed to follow such procedures in the past and instead have created clouds and residue of toxic lead dust around the building as they work. 26.- Regulations also require that the work area be segregated in order to prevent lead dust from travelng into other parts of the building. Speci?cally, the ?oors and openings of the work area not required for ventilation must be sealed with two layers of six-mil polyethylene sheeting and waterproof tape in order to prevent the dispersal of lead dust and debris. 28 RCNY Chapter 11 06(g)(vi). Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents have not properly sealed off work areas during past construction-As a result, lead-contaminated dust and debris from work sites have Spread into common areas and Petitioners? apartments. 27. In addition, a class violation currently exists for peeling paint that tested positive for lead content in Apartment 22, where Petitioner Miah lives with a child under the age of six, in violation of NYC Admin. Code 27-2056.6. 28. In 2008, the New York City Council passed the New York City Tenant Protection Act, Local Law No. 7 (2008) of the City of New York (?Local Law This law was enacted ?to address a perceived effort by landlords to empty rent-regulated apartments by harassing tenants into giving up their occupancy rights.? Aguaiza Vantage Props, LLC, 69 422, 893 19 (lst Dep?t 2010). Local Law 7 achieves its purpose by providing ?legal remedies for tenants experiencing harassment by landlords attempting to force them out.? Prometheus, 80 206 at 208. 29. Pursuant to Local Law 7, codi?ed in Paragraph Section 27?2004 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, harassment is de?ned as any act or omission by or on behalf of an owner that: causes or is intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy Iof a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy, and (ii) includes one or more of the following: other repeated acts or omissions of such signi?cance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such dwelling unit and that cause or are intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy. 34. The Landlord-Respondents have engaged in unlawful harassment by making the environment in the building hazardous to health and inhospitable to tenants, as part of a larger campaign to pressure the Petitioners into forfeiting their rent-regulated tenancies. 35. The illegal conditions and methods of demolition and construction work at the Building have created an unsafe living situation for Petitioners. Until there are assurances that Respondents will follow lead paint laws, and will cease" any further harassment of Petitioners, it will not be safe for construction to proceed at the premises. Petitioners Will Suffer Irrenarable Harm If a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Iniunction Are Not Issued 36. Exposure to lead paint, which Landlord-Respondents have caused and are causing today at the Building, constitutes irreparable harm, particularly as a developmental hazard for young children or pregnant women. New York courts have consistently and repeatedly held that lead paint causes irreparable harm. S_ee_ gg, Juarez v. Wavecrest Mgt., 212 38, 40 (1st Dep?t 1995); NYCCELP V. Vallone, 100 337, 342 (2003); Williamsburg Around the Bridge Block Ass?n v. Giuliani, 167 Misc.2d 980 Ct. N.Y. Co. 1995temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are not issued, then Landlord-Respondents are likely to continue their pattern of harassment, which includes creating a hazardous environment in the building in Violation of the laws regulating lead paint and protecting tenants? health and safety, causing Petitioners to suffer immediate and irreparable harm. I 3 8. Upon information and belief, Respondents plan to continue construction in the four currently vacant units in the Building. If construction remains consistent with past practices, ll act . . . tending to render the judgment ineffectua For this reason, courts routinely preliminarily enjoin building alterations pending the determination of the alterations? legality. S_ee 9g. South Ferry Bldg. Co. v. J. Henry Schroder Bank Trust Co., 91 963 (lst Dep?t 1983) (enjoining electrical alterations pending determination of whether alterations violated lease); Unique Laundry Corp. Park NY. LLC, 55 382 (lst Dep?t 2008) (enjoining removal of laundry room ?xtures pending determination of whether owner of ?xtures had tenancy right to occupy laundromat space); Chambers Delicatessen. Inc. v. Realty Equities Park Chambers Corp., 28 531 (lst Dep?t 1967) (enjoining alteration of storefront pending determination of whether alteration would violate lease). 41. If a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are. not issued, and Respondents are thereby permitted to continue harassing Petitioners and to circumvent the rent stabilization laws in order to remove these long-term tenants from the building, Petitioners will suffer immediate and irreparable harm. A Balancing of the Equities Weighs Decidedly in. Favor of Petitioners 42. As explained above, if the preliminary injunction is not granted, Petitioners face extremely serious harm in the form of the various health problems that can result from lead exposure. The very real prospect of more serious harm can only be avoided through injunctive relief. I 43. On the other hand, if the temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are issued, there will be no new burden or prejudice on Landlord-Respondents, as a landlord is not permitted to violate laws governing construction and lead paint. Petitioners merely seek an order ensuring that Landlord-Respondents comply with the law by ceasing their illegal l3 construction and harassment. The temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction sought by Petitioners would not even require Respondents to take any af?rmative actions. Rather, the preliminary injunction would merely ensure that Landlord-Respondents comply with their preexisting legal duties. 44. A preliminary injunction is therefore warranted and, until that hearing can be had, the Court should grant Petitioners a temporary restraining order with a stay in effect until the hearing date. Service of Process of this Order to Show Cause 45 . Petitioners request that they be permitted to serve the Proposed Order to Show Cause and supporting papers by overnight delivery to Landlord-Respondents. 46. Pursuant to NY. C.P.L.R 2217(b), no prior request for the relief sought herein, or any similar relief, has been made. Pursuant to NY. C.P.L.R 6001, no prior request has been made in this action for the provisional remedy requested herein, or for any other provisional remedy. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully submitted that the relief sought in the instant Order to Show Cause should be granted in its entirety. Dated: April ?5 201 New York, New York 14 Exhibit A CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART JEFF CALTABIANO, BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN . LEE, SHAHED MIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY Index No. MUI, and DAVID NG, HP /2015 -against- AFFIDAVIT OF SHAHED MIAH IN SUPPORT OF SASSAN MAHFAR, SINA MAHFAR, 102 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE NORFOLK LLC, SMA EQUITIES INC., - JEANETTE COLAIANNI, DAVID MOUS SEZADEH, and OMER ZWICKEL, Premises: 102 Norfolk Street Landlord Respondents, New York, NY 10002 and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING- PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK Respondents. STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK i 8.5.: Shahed Miah, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I l. I reside in Apartment 22 at 102 Norfolk Street, New York, New York. I am one of the Petitioners in this proceeding; as such, I am fully familiar with the facts of this proceeding. 2. I make this af?davit in support of this Order to Show Cause, to enjoin Respondents from ?lrther construction work without appropriate measures to protect tenants? health and safety, and to enjoin Respondents from engaging in any harassment of tenants in violation of Section 27-2005(d) of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. 3. I have lived in the building for about three and a half years with my family. My wife and four children live with me. My children are now ages 11, 8, 6 and four months. 4. As soon as the new landlord bought the building in March of last year, they began doing demolition and construction work in the building as if the building was unoccupied. It started right away and from the very beginning created tremendous amounts of dust and debris on the ?oors. We said it was like a war zone because of chunks of plaster and clouds of dust everywhere. 5. Demolition work in vacant apartments and in the stairwells started early each morning. I live on the top ?oor of the building, and each moming when I left to take my children to school we had to walk down six ?ights of stairs through clouds of dust the entire way. There is no way we could have avoided coming into contact with the dust. 6. The construction work continued for a long time. In September 2014, there was still a lot of dust coming into my apartment from demolition work in another apartment on our ?oor that the owner was converting from a two bedroom or a three-bedroom. They were knocking down a lot of walls in the apartment. 7. For a long time, I had no idea that the dust in the halls and coming into my apartment under the door contained lead, and that the lead was dangerous to my children, especially to my sen Abid, who was ?ve, and to my wife, who was pregnant at the time. 8. I only learned in about August or September 2014 about the lead that had been found in our building months earlier by the Department of Health. The tenants held a meeting with the owner in September 2014, and city of?cials from HPD and the Department of Health were there. At that meeting, the of?cials told us that if there were young children in an apartment and we were worried about peeling paint that might contain lead, we should call them right away for an inspection and lead test. 9. I had peeling paint in my apartment and was very worried about my kids, so when I got home I called HPD right away. Inspectors came to the apartment very quickly, and found lead paint around the window ?ame and the door in the kitchen. They issued a violation, but the landlord did not do anything to ?x the problem. 10. The only thing the landlord did was to come to our apartment and yell at us for calling 311. Galina from the management of?ce came in person to the apartment, when my wife was home, to yell at her. My wife said Galina should talk to me and called me so that I could talk to Galina. She kept asking me why I had called the city and said I should not have done that. I said that I called because of what happened at the meeting the same meeting the owner and management company people attended when HPD told us to call them if we had concerns. 11. Around October, since the landlord still hadn?t removed the peeling lead paint, HPD came to do the work themselves. They removed and replaced paint on the window frame and the door in the kitchen. There is still a lot of peeling paint in the bathroom, though, that I am really worried about. 12. There are a lot of repair issues in the bathroom that the landlord is-not dealing with. When I complained to the management company about the peeling paint and the cracks in the walls, they said it was not their issue. 13 . I also had an issue in my apartment with the heat being cut off because of renovations in the new apartments. In about October of last year, when it started to get cold, there was no heat in the living. room or the bathroom. The radiator and steam pipe in the living WHEREFORE, it is respectfully submitted that the relief sought in the instant Order to Show Cause should be granted in its entirety. Dated: April 2015 New York, New York 1. DH Sworn to before me Rachel Specter Notary Public State of New York o. Qualified in Kings Co 1 Commission Expires on I CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF. NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART JEFF BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN LEE, SHAHED MIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY Index No. MUI, and DAVID NG, HP /2015 -against? AFFIDAVIT OF CHERRY MUI IN SUPPORT OF SASSAN MAHFAR, SINA MAHFAR, SMSIS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RIVINGTON LLC, SMBRO RIVINGTON LLC, . . SMA EQUITIES INC., JEANETTE COLAIANNI, and OMER ZWICKEL, Premises: 102 Norfolk Street Landlord Respondents, New York, NY 10002 and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK Respondents. STATE OF NEW YORK S.S.: COUNTY OF NEW YORK Cherry Mui, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I reside in apartment 3 in 102 Norfolk Street, New York, New York. I am one of the Petitioners in this proceeding; as such, I am fully familiar with the facts of this proceeding. 2. I make this af?davit in support of this Order to Show Cause, to enjoin Respondents from further construction work without appropriate measures to protect? tenants? health and safety, and to enjoin Respondents from engaging in any harassment of tenants? health and safety, and to enjoin Respondents ?om engaging in any harassment of tenants in violation of Section 27-2005(d) of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. 3. My family and I have lived in this apartment for 43 years. 4. The building?s new owners and the management company, SMA, through their behavior and actions have clearly conveyed to me and my family that they do not care about us, and would prefer that we were not tenants in the building. For example, during our ?rst interaction while picking up my apartment keys, one of the new owners, David Mouzzadeh, asked if my family was interested in a buyout. I told him we would consider all of our options, but were not ready to make a decision. He proceeded to tell me that I should think about the well-being of my parents and be aware of the tremendous amount of construction that would take place. He then told me I should take into consideration the fact that the conditions in the building, as a result of the construction, would be very unpleasant to live through. This was my ?rst clue that they wanted us to leave the building. 5. Additionally, SMA management?s reluctance to provide us with a lease renewal made me feel like they wanted us to leave the building. Our apartment is rent stabilized, so I followed lease renewal guidelines and requested a renewal several months before the expiration of our lease. I never received a response to my request and it was not until a staff member from Council Member Chin?s of?ce reached out to our management of?ce that I received the renewal. After signing and returning the renewal lease, we requested, on several occasions, a signed copy of the lease. They have ignored our requests and as of April 1, 2015, we still do not have a copy of the lease. sold the building to the new owners. However, the Superintendent was involved with and knew of the ceiling issues in our bathroom. Because he remained our super when SMA management took over the building, SMA management was or should have been aware of the problem. "Without a ceiling, when we looked up, we could see the bathroom in the unit diagonally above us, and could hear the construction crew walking around and talking. We were so worried about debris falling from the unit above us that we called 311 to ?le a complaint about the missing ceiling and sloping structural beams. 10. In response to my complaint, a HPD inspector came to the building on April 18, 2014. The security guard stationed in the lobby would not let him enter the building. Luckily one of my neighbors saw the inspector and called me to let me know he was outside. My father was home at the time, and he quickly went downstairs to meet the HPD inspector. Even with my father escorting the inspector in, the security guard made another attempt to block the inspector from entering the buildingthe inspection, the inspector called me. He told me that he told the construction crew to temporarily cover the ceiling to protect us from debris until a new ceiling could be installed, and suggested that a structural engineer should assess the support beams. No engineer ever inspected the support beams, and the super did not come back to spackle the bathroom until a few weeks after the Emergency Services Unit reached out to the management company. 12. The HPD inspector also inspected our bedroom, and told the super that the walls and ceiling in the bedroom were deteriorating and needed to be ?xed. At the end of May, 2014, HPD called to check on the status of the repairs. I informed them that the walls and ceiling in the bedroom had not been repaired. HPD sent an inspector back out and it was disheartening to ?nd that high levels of lead had been discovered in our building, yet none of the tenants had been made aware of the problem. 16. I felt both enraged and helpless to know that the security guard had stopped City inspectors from entering our building. I was enraged that the owner had the audacity to instruct security guards to block City of?cials from checking for the unsafe conditions that the owner himself created. And I felt helpless that we were seeking assistance from the authority that is tasked with protecting us from unsafe conditions, but we were not getting the help we were asking for. 17. Despite receiving citations from the Health Department in April 2014 and June 2014, the owner, Mr. Mahfar continued to allow renovations and demolition to occur haphazardly and without any accountability. When local politicians stepped in, Mr. Mahfar agreed to stop the construction work, but then he had the galls to do the work contrary to the agreement he had made with tenants. 18. Now, I am extremely concerned about the 4 vacant units in the building, 3 of which are on my ?oor. All of these units likely contain lead and other hazardous material in the walls. I am sure the owners are eager to start renovations on them, and I am worried that demolition and construction work on these units will be hazardous to the health and well-being of my family and the rest of the tenants if it is not completed in an appropriate manner. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully submitted that the relief sought in the instant Order to Show Cause should be granted in its entirety. Dated: April 1, 2015 New York, New York Sworn to before me this Raghe? New Yo? - stat new - . Ouatiltedgi?pues 0? Comm-155K)? CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART JEFF CALTABIANO, BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN LEE, SHAHED MIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY Index No. MUI, and DAVID NG, HP /2015 Tenants Petitioners, AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID NG IN SUPPORT OF ORDER TO -against- SHOW CAUSE SASSAN MAHFAR, SINA MAHFAR, 102 NORFOLK LLC, SMA EQUITIES INC., DAVID Premises: MOUSSEZADEH, JEANETTE COLAIANNI, and 102 Norfolk Street OMER ZWICKEL, . New York, NY 10002 Landlord Respondents, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING . PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK Respondents. STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK I David Ng, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I reside in Apartment 23 at 102 Norfolk Street, New York, New York. I am one of the Petitioners in this proceeding; as such, I am fully familiar with the facts of this proceeding. 2. I make this af?davit in support of this Order to Show Cause, to enjoin Respondents from further construction work without appropriate measures to protect tenants? health and 10. understand what was happening. My father knew they were planning to charge us for the installation, so he waved the installer away because we did not want to pay for the new intercOm. But he did not understand that this meant we would have no intercom. Now it has been nearly eight months and we have no working intercom in the apartment. Becausewe do not know the reasons for much of the work done by SMA, we are often uncomfortable allowing the management into our apartment. For example, recently, I came home from work and found that a new toilet had been installed in our apartment. We did not receive any information about why the installation had occurred. When I spoke to the superintendent, he claimed that apartment 17 had a leak that was caused by the toilet in our apartment. But, Apartment 17 is not located below our apartment, and I was not provided with any advance notice that the installation would be done. As a result, I could not arrange to supervise the installation. This kind of behavior makes me feel i uncomfortable, and makes me worry about how many more times they will enter my apartment to install things without my knowledge. Additionally, the electricity in the building is a concern for me and my family. Most recently, on March 25, 2015, the power went out without any notice to the tenants. We hardly use any electricity in our apartment and did not know the power was off until my father opened the refrigerator and the light did not come on. I contacted SMA about the power outage and they told me that the superintendent was working on it. However, they did not provide us with notice that work was going to be done, and I am still unsure what work they were doing that required them to turn off our power. 11. My landlord?s conduct has made me feel cynical and uncomfortable living in my own home, and the unannounced entrance and installation in my apartment made me lose any remaining trust I had in the building?s management. 12. Because there are still vacant apartments in my building that I believe will be renovated I am afraid that my family and I, especially my father, will be forced to breathe in more dust contaminated with lead in the future. I fear that without protection from the court my family?s health will once again be at risk when construction resumes in our building. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully submitted that the relief sought in the instant Order to Show Cause should be granted in its entirety. gr? 9. Dated: 2015 New York, New York Sworn to before me this 4am? CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: HOUSING PART JEFF CALTABIANO, BRIAN CLARK, STEVEN LEE, .SHAHED MIAH, CHERRY MUI, SUK HAY Index No. MUI, and DAVID NG, HP /2015 Tenants Petitioners, VERIFIED PETITION -against- Premises: SASSAN MAHFAR, SINA MAHFAR, 102 102 Norfolk Street NORFOLK LLC, SMA EQUITIES INC., DAVID New York, NY 10002 MOUSSEZADEH, JEANETTE COLAIANNI, and OMER ZWICKEL, Landlord Respondents, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, and THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondents. Petitioners, by their attorneys, allege as follows: PRELIMINARY STATEMENT l. Petitioners seek an end to the harassment they have faced since Landlord- Respondents purchased 102 Norfolk Street and began pressuring rent-regulated tenants into . leaving their apartments, as well as conducting hazardous and negligent demolition and construction work in the building that ignored the health and safety of Petitioners. Landlord- Respondents? harassment campaign has included a pattern of unsafe demolition and construction that has exposed Petitioners and their families, including young children and a pregnant woman, to high concentrations of toxic lead; neglect'of serious conditions in Petitioners? apartments; and a refusal to accept Petitioners? right to remain in their homes. 2. Petitioners respectfully request this Court?s intervention in order to stop any ?iture harassment and prevent Landlord-Respondents from conducting any ?lrther demolition or construction activity until an agreed-upon plan is in place to protect tenants? health and safety. The Court has granted such relief in another currently-pending case involving a building owned and managed by the same parties, and should ensure that the same high standard of protection is applied 'here given Landlord-Respondents? record of unsafe and negligent construction work. See I Alarcon v. Mahfar, Index No. HP 401/2015 (N.Y. County). 3. The above-named Petitioners reside and are tenants at 102 Norfolk Street, New York, NY 10002 (the ?Building??). The Building is a multiple dwelling located in New York County, in the City and State of New York. 4. Petitioners, along with their families including young children and elderly people, occupy apartments in the Building as set forth in Exhibit A to this petition. Upon information and belief, a majority and/or all of the Petitioners? apart111ents are rent-stabilized. I 5. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents purchased the Building in March 2014. Since then, Landlord-Respondents have conducted extensive demolition 'work without regard to Petitioners? safety, and have exposed tenants to pervasive dust contaminated with high levels of lead. They have also discontinued certain basic services and repeatedly shut off utilities, and have failed to complete necessary repairs in Petitioners? apartments. Moreover, Landlord-Respondents have attempted to frustrate inspections by city of?cials and to intimidate tenants seeking to enforce their rights to a safe living environment. 6. In short, Landlord-Respondents have generally engaged in a campaign of harassment by making conditions .in the building unsafe and seeking to frustrate Petitioners? efforts to secure their rights to a safe and healthy home. Landlord-Respondents? harassment of Petitioners is consistent with similar behaviOr that Landlord-Respondents have exhibited at other properties under their ownership. A number of previous tenants have already departed the Building as a result of these conditions. 7. Despite repeated requests from Petitioners and the offices of local elected officials, Landlord?Respondents have failed to demonstrate willingness or ability to meaningfully protect the health and safety of the tenants during demolition and construction. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents intend to commence demolition and construction work in the four currently vacant apartments in the near future. Therefore, - Petitioners are very concerned that Landlord-Respondents will proceed with work in the other vacant units using the same negligent practices that have thus far put Petitioners? health at risk. 8. Petitioners respectfully request this Court?s immediate intervention in order to stop Landlord-Respondents? illegal construction work, which is creating a hazardous environment and endangering Petitioners? health and safety. Without preliminary relief, Petitioners and their families, including children under six, will be irreparany harmed by Landlord-Respondents? activities. mm 9. The above-named Petitioners reside and are tenants at 102 Norfolk Street, New .York, NY 10002 (the ?Building?). The Building is a multiple dwelling located in New York County, in the City and State of New York. 10. Petitioners occupy apartments in the Building as set forth in Exhibit A to this petition. Upon information and belief, a majority and/or all of the Petitioners? apartments are rent-stabilized. 11. Upon information and belief, the following Respondents are ?owners? as that term is de?ned by the Administrative Code of the City of New Admin. Code?) ?27-2004 and are directly or indirectly in control of the premises: a. SASSAN MAHFAR is an. of?cer of 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC, the owner of the subject building and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. b. SINA MAHFAR is an of?cer of 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC, the owner of the subject building and. as suCh is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. c. DAVID MOUSSEZADEH is a Partner/ Member of 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC, the owner of the subject building and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. I d. 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC is the owner of the Building and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. - e. Upon information and belief, SMA EQUITIES INC. is the managing agent for 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC, and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. f. JEANETTE COLAIANNI is a managing agent for 102 NORFOLK STREET LLC, and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing Maintenance Code. g. Upon information and belief, OMER ZWICKEL is the Director of Asset Management and Construction at SMA Equities Inc., and as such is a proper respondent in this proceeding in accordance with the Housing MaintenanceCode. 12. Respondent NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT is the City Department charged with enforcement of, inter alia, the Housing Maintenance Code. HPD is named herein pursuant to I NYC Admin. Code ?27-2115(h) and New York City Civil Court Act ?110(d). . 13. Respondent THE DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK is the City Department charged with enforcement of, inter alia, the Buildings Code. DOB is named herein pursuant to New York City Civil Court Act ?1 10(d). 14. Respondent THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGENE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK is the City Department charged with enforcement of, inter alia, the Health Code. DOHMH is named herein pursuant to New York City Civil Court Act ?110(d). NEW YORK CITY LEAD LAWS 15. The New York City Administrative Code and the Rules of the City of New York have detailed lead-safe work requirements for construction in residential housing. The requirements apply to all multiple dwelling buildings constructed before 1960, including the Premises. There are speci?c procedures required for job site preparation, work methods, and daily clean up. Landlord-Respondents are not in compliance with those procedures. NYC Admin. Code 17?181, 27-2056.11 (and .5, .16, 24 RCNY 173.14; 28 RCNY Chapter 11. 16. Debris in the work area and adjoining areas must be HEPA vacuumed or wet swept and disposed of in sealed plastic bags every day during construction. 28 RCNY Chapter 11 06(g)(iX)- 17. However, upon information and belief, unbagged debris has been disposed of in an unsafe manner that creates clouds and residue 'of toxic lead dust around the building. Furthermore, upon information and belief, the walls and ?oors in the common areas are not being cleaned or washed, as required by law. 18. There are also regulations in place to segregate the work area and prevent lead dust from traveling into other parts of the building. The ?oors and openings of the work area not required for ventilation must be sealed with two layers of six-mil polyethylene sheeting and waterproof tape in order to prevent the dispersal of lead dust and debris. 28 RCNY Chapter 11 06(ngi). 19. The law also requires owners, in advance of performing work that will disturb more than 100 square feet of paint of unknown lead content in a building constructed prior to 1960, to submit a notice of commencement of work to DOHMH and to post a copy of such notice in the building. N.Y.C. Adm. Code 20. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents have not given advance notice of work. They have not properly sealed off work areas. Dust and debris from work sites routinely spread into common areas whenever construction takes place. Furthermore, the toxic dust and debris has entered into Petitioners? apartments from the work site and has been found in especially high concentrations around Petitioners? front doors, which have not been adequately covered. THE NEW YORK CITY TENAN PROTECTION ACT - 21 . In 2008, the New York City Council passed the New York City Tenant Protection Act, Local Law No. 7 (2008) of the City of New York (?Local Law This law was enacted ?to address a perceived effort by landlords to empty rent?regulated apartments by harassing tenants into giving up their occupancy rights.? Aguaiza Vantage Props. LLC, 69 422, 893 19 (1st Dep?t 2010). Local Law 7 achieves its purpose by providing ?legal remedies for tenants experiencing harassment by landlords-attempting to force them out.? Prometheus Realty Corp. et al. v. City of New York, 80 206, 208, 911 299 (1 st Dep?t 2010). I 22. Pursuant to Local Law 7, codi?ed in Paragraph Section 27-2004 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, harassment is de?ned as any act or omission by or on behalf of an owner that: causes or is intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such Occupancy, and (ii) includes one or more of the following:- repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such dwelling unit and that cause or are intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy. Adm. Code 23. The Administrative Code of the City of New York further provides that: The-owner of a dwelling shall not harass any tenants or persons lawfully entitled to occupancy of such dwelling as set forth in paragraph 48 of subdivision a of section 27?2004 of this chapter. N.Y.C. Adm. Code I 24. Should a landlord violate 27-2005(d) of the Administrative Code, the harassment ?shall be a class immediately hazardous violation.? N.Y.C. Adm. Code 27- 21 1 5(m)(1 I 25. Pursuant to Section of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, if a violation of harassment is found, the Court: 0 may issue an order restraining the owner of the property from centinuing to harass the tenant(s) and directing the owner to ensure that no further harassment occurs; 0 shall impose a civil penalty of not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000 for each dwelling unit in which a tenant or any person law?illy entitled to occupancy of such. unit has been the subject of the harassment; I may provide such other relief as the Court deems appropriate. 26. This remedial Code also empowers this Court to enjoin a landlord from harassing a tenant or a group of tenants. N.Y.C. Adm. Code ?27-2120(b) tenant, or person or group of persons lawfully entitled to occupancy may individually or jointly apply to the housing part of the civil court for an order restraining the owner of the property from engaging in harassment?). al? m, 69 422 at 424 (referring to Administrative Code ?27- 2120(b), the court noted that a ?joint? claim may be brought by a group of tenants ?as an alternative to pleading repeated wrongful conduct against an individual?); N.Y.C. Adm. Code ?27-2121 (the Housing Part ?may issue such preliminary, temporary or ?nal orders requiring the owner . . . to correct violations of this code, or to comply with an order or notice of the department, or to take such other steps as the court may deem necessary to assure continuing compliance with the requirements of this code . . 27. This Court has broad discretion and authority to make preliminary and permanent injunctions on behalf of tenants in Housing Part proceedings as may encourage the preservation of housing. New York City Civil Court Act Art. 1 110(a)(4). Without regard to the relief originally sought, the Court may ?employ any remedy, program, procedure or sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of housing standards, if it believes they will be more effective to accomplish Compliance or to protect and promote the public interest. . New York City Civil Court Act Art. 1 110(0). 28. The authority to issue injunctions is not limited to issuing orders to correct conditions needing repair. Prometheus Realty Corp. et v. City of New York, 80 206, 911 299 (1 St Dep?t 2010) (in holding that the Housing Part has equitable jurisdiction to protect residential tenants ?'om harassment by their landlords, the court noted that Civil Court Act 110(a)(4) ?authorizes the Housing Part to issue equitable relief such as 999 restraining orders and injunctions in order to enforce ?housing standards and that this power is not restricted only to causes of action involving the physical conditions of buildings). The enforcement of minimum housing standards is necessary to protect the welfare of the people of New York City. (NYC. Adm. Code 27?2002. Prometheus, 80 206 at 212 (referring to Administrative Code 27-2002, the court noted that ?the legislative declaration in the Housing Maintenance Code indicates an intent to protect tenants' actual occupancy?, as well as the physical condition of the premises, in that it explicitly declares a need to protect tenants in areas of ?health and sa?ty, ?re protection, light and ventilation, cleanliness, repair and maintenance, and occupancy in dwellings? [emphasis added]). The duties and responsibilities imposed on both owners and the City of New York are enforceable by a range cf legal, equitable, and administrative powers. Thus, this court has ample authority to fashion an appropriate order and remedy that will protect Petitioners? tenancies. STATEMENT OF FACTS Landlord-Respondents Have in Illegal and Hazardous Demolition and Construction Work at the Building and Exgosed Petitioners to High Levels of Lead Landlord-Respondents Par?hase Building and Immediately Engage in Illegal and Unsafe Construction Work - . 29. Upon information and belief, 102 Norfolk St., LLC purchased the Building in March 2014. Since then, Landlord-Respondents have caused substantial health hazards and substandard conditions in the building through their negligent construction practices. These practices violate the Housing Maintenance Code, the Building Code and the Health Code by creating a hazardous environment for tenants living in occupied units. This pattern of misconduct began on or about April 2014, when Landlord-Respondents commenced demolition work in the Building?s common areas. Landlord-Respondents began extensive demolition in the hall and stairwell, tearing plaster off all walls to expose underlying brick. Around the same time, Landlord?Respondents also began gut renovations in vacant apartments, again knocking down walls and creating extensive construction debris. 30. Landlord-Respondents conducted this work without adequate measures to clean debris from the ?oor or remove it safely from the building, to contain dust, or to avoid exposing residents to lead, asbestos or other toxic contaminants. As a result, in addition to clouds of dust in the common areas throughout the duration of construction, in?ltration of construction dust and dirt into Petitioners? apartments became a constant problem. 10 31. Landlord-Respondents did not properly seal the doors of apartments in which they were performing gut renovations. 32. Upon information and belief, the Landlord-Respondents ?led a permit request for this work with the DOB on March 25, 2014 and a permit was issued on April 10, 2014. However, the permit application falsely asserted that the building lacked any occupied housing units subject to rent stabilization. See dated March 24, 2014, attached as Exhibit C. 33. The DOB later conducted an audit of Landlord-Respondents? permits and on or about December 30, 2014 issued a notice of intent to revoke approvals and permits for the building. The DOB ordered Landlord?Respondents to review and revise the tenant protection plan to specify that the building contains Units that would be occupied during construction, set forth the means and methods that would be employed to protect the health and safety of tenants in the building, and review the statement of compliance with laws regarding lead paint and asbestos. I 34. Landlord-Respondents also failed to post anywhere in the building a notice of commencement of work disturbing at least 100 square feet of lead paint, as required by Local Law 1 of 2004 in any multiple dwelling with at least three units built before 1960, where a child under the age of 6 resides. N.Y.C. Adm. Code 27-20561 35. In sum, prior to commencing construction in April 2014, in violation of several laws, Landlord-Respondents took no steps to notify Petitioners of potential risks associated with work that would very likely disturb large amounts of lead paint, nor did they notify DOB of how they planned to mitigate those risks and protect the health and safety of residents. 36. Landlord-Respondents did take unusual steps to police entry into the building. Upon information and belief, they disabled the entry door lock system and hired a security guard 11 during approximately the last two weeks of April 2014, claiming that the guard was there to protect tenants? safety. Landlord-Respondents posted a notice saying the security guard would require govemment?issued photo identi?cation from all tenants seeking to enter their homes. If the guard stepped away from his post at the door, because the lock system was disabled it was impossible for tenants to enter or to leave the building. Upon information and-belief, the security guard refused access to City inspectors responding to complaints at the building. 37. Meanwhile, the demolition and construction at the Building beginning in April 2014' created clouds of dust each day throughout the halls and stairwells. Because Landlord- Respondents failed to take legally required steps to wet mop ?oors and walls or prevent dust migration into Petitioners? apartments, dust lingered in common areas and gathered inside Petitioners? apartments, entering through doorways as well as raining down from ceilings and walls during demolition in adjacent units. 38. Petitioners could not escape coming into contact with construction dust, and particularly when entering or leaving the building the dust would cover their clothing. Dust was so pervasive that at times the security guard posted at the building?s front entrance during April was covered in white dust from head to toe. 39. Dust also migrated into Petitioners? apartments under the doors, up to ten feet into the apartment. Petitioners had to clean up the dust at least once a day. Landlord-Respondents Repeatedly Violate Lead Paint Laws and Put Tenants Health at Risk 40. On multiple occasions City inspectors found that the construction dust blanketing the common areas contained extremely elevated levels of lead, far above legal limits set to protect health. 12 41. On or about April 22, 2014, a DOHMH inspector took samples of dust from common areas throughout the building for lead testing. Tests revealed that the dust on the public stairs from the ?fth to sixth ?oors contained 110,000 micrograms of lead per square foot, which is 2,750 times the legal limit of 40 micrograms per square foot. Dust on the public stairs from the ?rst to second ?oors contained 40,000 micrograms of lead per square foot, which is 1,000 times the legal limit. See April 22, 2014 Inspection Report, attached hereto as Exhibit D. 42. Landlords-Respondents strongly resisted DOHMH inspection prior to and on April 22, 2014. When a DOHMH inspector came to the building to respond to a complaint on April 18, 2014 and attempted to inspect again on April 21, 2014, the security guard stationed at - the door refused to allow him to enter. The inspector only gained access to the Building on April 22, 2014 by obtaining a police escort. While the inspector was in the Building on that day, Respondent Omer Zwickel confronted him and threatened him with legal action for trespassing. See April 22, 2014 Inspection Report Notes, p. 8, Exhibit D. 43. On or about June 18, 2014, a second DOHMH inspection revealed that lead levels throughout the Building remained far above the legal limits. Out of seventeen (17) dust wipe samples collected by the DOHMH inspector, nine (9) revealed lead at levels ranging ?om twice to eighteen (18) times the legal limit. See June 18, 2014 Inspection Report, attached as Exhibit E. 44. This lead dust is particularly hazardous for the young children who live in the Building and/or regularly spend time at their grandparents? apartments in the Building. At the time DOHMH found the extremely elevated lead levels in the building, several children under the age of six resided in the building, and a tenant of Apartment 22, the wife of Petitioner Shahed Miah, was pregnant with a child born in January 2015. 45. Upon information and belief, after receiving notice from DOHMH in April 2014 13 of elevated lead levels throughout the common areas of the building, Landlord-Respondents took no action. Upon infermation and belief, Landlord-Respondents failed to conduct follow?up clearance testing for lead as required by DOHMH during the months that followed the April 2014 test; Nor is there any indication that Landlord-Respondents required contractors to change their work practices to reduce exposure to lead dust at this time. I 46. Upon information and belief, Landlord-Respondents took no action or inadequate action to address lead dust after the June 2014 inspectiOn, resulting in a DOHMH Notice of Violation for lead based paint and dust hazards issued on or about July 28, 2014, due to construction dust containing high levels of lead remaining in common areas throughout the building. 47.. Landlord-Respondents failed to notify Petitioners of the results of DOHMH testing in April and June 2014 that revealed extremely high levels of lead throughout the - building. Petitioners had no knowledge of the lead levels or test results until months later, in August 2014, after ?ling a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request with DOHMH for records relating to the inspections at their Building. Meetings with Landlord-Respondents to Address Health and Safety Issues Fail to Result in Meaning-?ll Changes 48. Petitioners have sought to meet with Landlord-Respondents to obtain adequate health and safety protections without resorting to legal action. 49. On or about August 14, 2014, several Petitioners met with Respondent Sassan (a/k/a ??Samy?) Mahfar and Respondent Omer Zwickel to discuss their concerns related to the demolition and construction work in the Building. 14 50. Because Landlord-Respondents were not following promises made at the initial meeting, on or about September 11, 2014 several Petitioners met again with Mr. Mahfar and Mr. Zwickel, along with representatives from the of?ces of elected of?cials and city agencies. At the conclusion of that meeting, Landlord?Respondents agreed to: create and provide a lead mitigation plan to the tenants; provide tenants with adequate and advance noti?cations of any ?lture construction work; translate noti?cations into Chinese and provide access to language translation services; identify construction workers with nametags; and schedule construction work in individual units. 51. During the September meeting, Mr. Mahfar assured the tenants that there would be no further demolition work until he had developed a better plan to mitigate the dust and air pollution. However, some renovation work continued after the meeting, and Petitioners observed workers in vacant units who appeared to be preparing for the next round of demolitions, even though no plan regarding lead mitigation had been provided to the tenants. 52. On October 15, 2014, when Petitioners had still not received any lead mitigation plan, several New York City and New York State elected of?cials sent a letter to Mr. Mahfar notng their serious concerns about the dangerous construction practices that were putting the health of tenants, including young children, at risk. See Exhibit F. 53. On or about November 14, 2014, Mr. Mahfar ?nally provided a lead mitigation plan to the tenants. However, the mitigation plan only covers work to be done in two apartments and electrical work in the common areas of the building. Upon information and belief, Respondents intend to do demolition and construction work in other vacant apartments, speci?cally apartments 2 and 24, in the near future, and will likely gut renovate other units as well if they become vacant. Nor does the plan cover other work that may occur in the cominon 15 areas of the building, or work to upgrade major systems that could disturb lead paint in Petitioners? apartments. Therefore, the current lead mitigation plan is inadequate and Petitioners are very concerned that Respondents will proceed with work without a comprehensive mitigation plan in place. 54. Moreover, upon information and belief Landlord-Respondents have failed to follow similar tenant protection and lead mitigation plans in other buildings they own where they are conducting the same type of work, even after November 2014. Thus Petitioners do not trust that Landlord-Respondents will follow this plan without a court order. or other supervision. Landlord~Respondents Unsafe Construction Practices Cause Damage in Petitioners? . Apartments 55. In addition to exposing Petitioners to unsafe lead dust, Landlord-Respondents? work to demolish vacant apartments has placed tenants? health and safety at risk in other ways. 56. For example, demolition and construction in a unit adjacent to Apartment 14 caused multiple cracks and holes large enough for air and dust to seep through into Apartment 14. A nail from the adjacent apartment protruded an inch through the wall into the bedroom of Apartment 14, right next to Petitioner Steven Lee?s bed, and Landlord-Respondents repeatedly delayed responding to requests to ?x these problems. 57. Demolition and construction in a unit directly above Apartment 10 caused a steady rain of dust and debris to fall from the ceiling of Apartment 10. During construction, dust and debris would often fall from the ceiling onto the bed of an elderly resident of Apartment 10, who was bedridden due to a chronic health condition. The tenants had to clean the apartment multiple times a day because of the dust. 58. Construction in the unit above also caused'a major segment of the bathroom l6 ceiling of Apartment 1 to cave in, leaving debris and dirt everywhere. The elderly tenant was in the apartment at the time but was luckily not harmed. Landlord-Respondents Have Discontinued Essential Services and Subjected Petitioners to Repeated Utili? Disruptions 59. Landlord?Respondents have repeatedly shut down essential services throughout the building, including ?rll shut downs of the heat, water, and electricity systems, signi?cantly I disrupting tenants? ability to use and enjoy their apartments. Upon information and belief, some or all services were shut down on the following dates in 2014: April 9; May 27; May 28; June 3; June 4; June 12; June 13; June 17; June 23; June'24; July 2; July 28; July 31; August 4; August 12; August 20; August 29; September 12; September 15; September 22; October 7; October 8; November 11; November 12; and December 8. Upon information and belief, some or all services were shut down on the following dates in 2015: January 16; and February 25. 60. Upon information and belief, in the course of renovating and upgrading the vacant apartments, Landlord-Respondents also permanently cut off steam to a line of pipes that provided heat to several tenants.? apartments, including to the living room and bathroom of Apartment 22. In doing so, Landlord-Respondents provided no notice to tenants that they were cutting off the source of heating to several rooms in their apartments. 61. Petitioner Shah Miah in Apartment 22 only discovered that steam had been cut off to these pipes in approximately October 2014, 'when it began to get cold and the radiator and steam pipe in his living room and the steam pipe in his bathroom were completely cold. He complained to the super in the building. . 62. Landlord-Respondents took approximately three weeks to restore heat to the living room, and about six weeks to restore heat to the bathroom. Because of renovations to 17 apartments below him that permanently disabled steam to the pipes, they had to install a new pipe to tap steam from a pipe in the kitchen and connect it to the radiator in the living room. This involved cutting large holes in the-wall to install the pipe, which to this day have not been completely closed off. 63. On or about August 5, 2014, Landlord-Respondents disabled the existing door buzzer and intercom system to install a high?end intercom system for the newly renovated apartments, even though upon information and belief the prior intercom system was ?illy functional at the time. 64. At the August 14, 2014 meeting with tenants, Landlord-Respondents stated that the intercom service would be restored for current rent-stabilized tenants within two weeks. However, after 8 months without intercom service, SMA Equities has not yet connected many of Petitioners? apartments to the new intercom system. Upon information and belief, the intercom has been fully functioning for the newly renovated market-rate apartments since October 2, 2014. 65. In order to install the new intercoms in individual apartments, Landlord- Respondents requested all day access to Petitioners? apartments for four full days, from September 29 to October 2, 2014. However, on the ?rst scheduled day of installation, the contractor did not arrive or contact Petitioners to schedule appointments for installation, and did not begin the installations. Landlord-Respondents failed to respond to multiple requests and attempts by Petitioners to schedule installation appointments within the four day time frame. 66. In'response to. questions from some Petitioners about why the installation was necessary when they already had a functioning intercom, Landlord-Respondents represented the work in a way that led some Petitioners to believe it was not necessary to have the new system 18 installed to continue their intercom service, and to believe that they would have to pay for the installation and that it would be extremely invasive. 67. Landlord-Respondents have refused to connect Petitioners to the new intercom system now that the four-day period has passed, despite repeated requests to do so. Some Petitioners have submitted rent reduction applications to New York Housing and Community Renewal based on decreased services, since they have gone nearly eight months without any intercom service. 68. Without a ?lnctioning intercom or door buzzer, many Petitioners have no safe way to screen visitors or allow people entry to the building. The lack of intercoms has also impeded the ability of inspectors ?om various agencies to gain access to the Building to conduct inspections. Landlord-Respondents ail to Perform Maintenance and Make Necelssagg Repairs 69. While conducting unsafe gut renovations on vacant apartments in the building, Landlord-Respondents have failed to address, or signi?cantly delayed addressing many of the necessary repairs that Petitioners require in their apartments. 70. For example, Landlord-Respondents delayed and ultimately never properly repaired collapsing ceilings and walls in Apartment 3. After a partial ceiling collapse in the bathroom, which left unstable support beams from the ceiling above visible, Landlord- Respondents took no action until HPD issued a violation. While the super came to repair the ceiling several Weeks after the HPD inspection, he only installed a temporary ceiling and no action has been taken to repair or shore up the support beams above it, or install a permanent ceiling replacement. l9 71. Landlord-Respondents took no action to remedy the serious violations based on deteriorating ceiling and Walls in the bedroom of Apartment 3 for approximately six months. In November 2014, When, upon infermation and belief, HPD had or was about to initiate enforcement proceedings against Landlord-Respondents for failure to correct the violation, the SUper arrived to conduct repairs. 72. Landlord-Respondents routinely send the super, who is not quali?ed to do work other than routine repairs, to do more complex construction, plumbing or electrical repairs in Petitioners? apartments, which the super is then unable to Complete. This fuither delays completion of necessary repairs in Petitioners? apartments. 73'. Additionally, while Landlord-Respondentsare dedicating resources to the vacant apartments, other serious housing code violations in PetitiOners? apartments and the common areas are being ignored. The HPD open violation list is annexed as Exhibit B. 74. Landlord?Respondents have repeatedly failed to respond to or take any action in response to Petitioner?s complaints about the noise created by commercial tenant The Back Room, thereby failing to ensure Petitioner?s right to quiet enjoyment of their property. Upon information and belief, the space in which the tenant operates its bar and lacks proper soundproo?ng. In addition to calling 311, Petitioners have submitted repeated complaints to Landlord-Respondents about loud music coming ?om the commercial tenant?s establishment, which continues until 4:00 am, often causing the furniture within their apartments to shake. Landlord?Respondentshave failed to respond to Petitioners? complaints, and upon information and belief have taken no action with respect to the commercial tenant. 20 Landlord-Respondents Have Subiected Petitioners to Ongoing Harassment 75. In addition to subjecting Petitioners to dangerous construction work and discontinuing key services in the Building, Landlord-Respondents and their agents continue to harass Petitioners in other ways in an attempt to encourage them to surrender their apartments. 76. Shortly after Landlord-Respondents purchased the Building in March 2014, Landlord-Respondents began pressuring Petitioners and other tenants about surrendering their apartments. On several occasions, Landlord-Respondents mentioned impending disruptive construction activity in the building as a reason to leave, particularly because the construction would cause conditions that would be dif?th for elderly residents to live with. 77. Even before tenants knew there was a new owner of the building, tenant relocators from the company Misidor LLC, including Misidor principal, Michel Pimienta, also began harassing some Petitioners and other tenants about surrendering their apartments. On at least one occasion, Pimienta along with a Chinese interpreter came to tenants? doors, and represented himself to a Petitioner as a city of?cial or as an employee of the management company. Petitioners later recognized this individual as Michel Pimienta based on photographs. 78. In October 2014, Misidor was sanctioned and Misidor and its principal, Michael Pimienta, were barred from engaging in the tenant relocation business by the New York State Attorney General for engaging in unlawful tenant harassment and operating without a real estate license. The Attorney General? 5 investigation found that Misidor engaged in a pattern of tenant harassment, through activities such as falsely accusing rent-regulated tenants of lease violations, threatening tenants with eviction, and repeatedly harassing and stalking tenants who indicated that they did not want to consider a buyOut offer. See ?Attorney General Schneiderman Secures Agreement Shuttering Company that Engaged in Unlawful Tenant Harassment,? Oct. 27, 2014, 21 engaged-unlawful-tenant. 79. Upon information and belief, in about April 2014, Respondent and several associates arrived at the Building without prior noti?cation and knocked on tenants? doors, asking if they had been calling 311 to complain about unsafe work practices. 80'. In about September 2014, a representative of SMA Equities came to Apartment 22, at the time the home of three young children, and aggressively yelled at the tenant, complaining that the tenant should not have called 311 about a-possible lead paint violation in the apartment. I 81. Respondent Omer Zwickel has told Petitioner Brian Clark on multiple occasions that he should tell other tenants to stop contacting 311 about conditions in the building and their apartments. 82. Landlord-Respondents have also refused to or delayed offering renewal leases to' rent-stabilized tenants, which they are required to do by law at least ninety days in advance of the lease expiration. Some Petitioners had to request renewal leases multiple times, and those who have received renewal leases only got them after their prior leases had expired. Some Petitioners have never received renewalleases even though their prior leases have expired, but Landlord- Respondents nevertheless charge an increased rent. The failure to offer renewal leases leaves tenants anxious about the status of their tenancy and right to continue living in the building. 83 . Landlord-Respondents have repeatedly and unnecessarily required Petitioners to present government-issued photo identi?cation, and have insisted on photocopying IDs, in interactions with the management of?ce. For example, tenants had to provide photo ID to obtain new entry door keys in April 201 4, new mailbox keys in February 2015, and were informed that 22 86. Furthermore, under the Civil Court Act ?110(c), a court has broad equity jurisdiction to give tenants a forum to enforce the housing standards which directly impacts their health and safety. Speci?cally, the Court may ?employ any remedy, program, procedure or sanction authorized by law for the enforcement of housing standards, if it believes they will be more effective to accomplish compliance or to protect and promote the public interest.? D?Agostino v. Fortv-Three East Equities Com, 12 Misc.3d .486, 820 (N Civ.Ct., 2006). Thus, the relief sought herein is proper and within the jurisdiction of this Court. 87. Because conditions in the building constitute an emergency or a danger to the life, health and safety of the tenants, Petitioners request that prior noti?cation to the Department of Housing Preservation and Development be waived. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that this Court issue an order: (1) Directing the Respondents to correct all the Violations of the Housing Maintenance Code, the Building Code and Multiple Dwelling Law that exist in the Petitioners? apartments and the public areas of the building in a workmanlike manner using quali?ed contractors; (2) Directing Landlord- Respondents to correct all the violations of the Housing Maintenance Code, the Building Code and Multiple Dwelling Law that are recorded during the'course of this litigation in a Workmanlike manner using quali?ed contractors; (3) Enj oining Landlord-Respondents from conducting any demolition and/or construction work in the building that poses a risk to the health and safety of the Petitioners and occupants including, but not limited to, demolition, drilling, and installation of drywall and painting, pending the resolution of this case; (4) Ordering Landlord- Respondents to provide Petitioners with 24 hours written notice when a utility service is to be interrupted and to provide one-week notice in advance of major demolition work in any part of 24 the Building which includes, but is not limited to, gutting of ?xtures and walls, jack hammering of plastered surfaces and any other time when dust contamination will occur; (5) Ordering Landlord-Respondents to provide adequate janitorial services throughout the building and outside areas that addresses the accumulation of dust and garbage that results from the aforementioned construction work; (6) Ordering Landlord-Respondents to abide by certain work safety praCtices during construction work which shall include, but is not limited to, providing HEPA air ?lters to occupied units; using HEPA air scrubbers in vacant apartments and apartments under construction; mopping, sweeping and dusting halls, stairs and banisters after the work is ?nished for the day; covering all doors with plastic and ensuring work crews keep vacant apartment doors covered during the work day; (7) Ordering Landlord-Respondents to proVide Petitioners with a legally adequate Tenant Protection Plan and a revised and more comprehensive Lead Mitigation Plan and to adhere to said plans; (8) Ordering a permanent injunction requiring Landlord-Respondents to cease engaging in harassment; (9) Imposing civil penalties upon the Landlord-ReSpondents pursuant to Section 27-2115 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York for failing to correct the outstanding violations of the Housing Maintenance Code and Multiple Dwelling Law in the subject premises within the time required by law and pursuant to Section of the Administrative Code of the City of New York for harassment; (11) and providing such other and further relief as may be just and proper, including costs and disbursements of this action and awarding attorney?s fees, as appropriate. Dated: New York, New York April 15, 2015 @athl Garrett Wright, of HARVEY EPSTEIN, ESQ. 25 Co-Counsel for. Petitioners URBAN JUSTICE CENTER 123 William St., 16th Floor New York, NY 1003 8 WSOD Ladov . chel Speet ?Counsel for Petitioners NEW YORK LAWYERS FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST 151 West 30th Street, 11th Floor New York, NY 10001 Tel: 212-244-4664 26 VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK I 5.3.: COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April 2015 New York, New York A Name: MI A py/ Sworn to before me this day of April, 2015 Rachel Spegglew York TARY If: ublic State ?may :10. 025P?2?1909?u Quali?ed in @393? Commission Emil?a VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own-knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April L, 2015 New York, New York %Md Nari; 90k af?x/of Sworn to before me this day of April, 2015 YP Il'i'c Rachel York - tat 1 Mom! Qualtig?adgp?es (MW commas." VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK I S.S.Z COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April 2015 New York, New York WV Name: I . 9am) Sworn to before me this . day of April, 2015 NO ARWIC hel Specter ??ic State of New York Notary 01999 No. Qualified in Commission Expires on VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April :11, 2015 New York, New York Sworn to before me this i day of April, 2015 27? w/ (9 Rachel Spe?g?a ew York but: Sta 8 4? 99 Pu 09.813620 13m (rum-5E: in Kings?: {room r3, Commission Expires VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and saysthe petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April i, 2015 Leg, New York, New York Name: Sworn to before me this day of April, 2015 NOTW she-i Specter Nora._ . of New York - Kings Commissnon Expires on VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April 1, 2015 New York, New York I Nf?eiibn'omij Sworn to before me this day of April, 2015 VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK I S.S.Z COUNTY OF NEW YORK The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am one of the petitioners in this proceeding. 2. I have read or heard the foregoing petition. 3. The matters in the petition are true to my own knowledge, except for the matters stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. Dated: April 2015 New York, New York Name: zrr?q% Sworn to before me this i day of April, 2015 NOTARY ?363le Rachel Specter - wYork Notary Public Staten N3 N0. 02$?620199 Qualitied?in Kings 0 Commission on Exhibit A List of Petitioners Petitioner Apartment Jeff Caltabiano 9 Brian Clark 13 Steven Lee I .14 Shahed Miah 22 Cherry Mui 3 Suk Hay Mui 3 David Ng 23 Exhibit HPD Building Info 4114/2015 040715 HPD Building, Registration Violation Services I Home The selected address: 102 NORFOLK STREET, Manhattan 10002 . Range Block Lot CD CcnsosTIact Stories A Units Units Ownership .Registration# Class 2598? Active 102-104 00353 0049 3 1402 6 25 0 PVT 129612 other I I I - I Building Registration Summary Report Property - Owner Find Apartment# I .C?Iear Seal??- I Registration . Information Last Reg Charges Dt . House Street Owner Reg Organization Last Nm First Nm No Hm Apt city State zip Map Expire Dt GREAT Complaint Head Of?cer 3332:3312 MAHFAR SASSAN 185 NECK 250 NY 11021 Status RD GREAT Complaint Of?cer gg?g?g i; MAHFAR SINA 135 NECK 250 325?? NY 11021 History RD GREAT . 09l10f2014 102 NORFOLK GREAT Submit corpc?ratm? 091002015 STREET, LLC 185 250 NECK NY ?021 Certificate - of . 09f10l2014 - ALLEN NEW Installation Managing Agent COLAIANNI JEANETTE 130 STREET YORK NY 10002 GREAT Litigation/cage PartnerfMember MOUSSEZADEH DAVID 185 NECK 250 Egg? NY 11021 ?tatus RD All Open Violation; Open Violations - ALL DATES There are 35 Violations. Arranged by category: A class: 5 class: 24 class: 6 1 Open Viol-?5 For Definitions of the columns indicated below, select glossary under the Services option (located at the upper right). Ecerti?cation To sort the columns, click on their underlined headers below in the blue area. Apt Reported Order Violation Violation Description Status Certify By Story Date. Class no Status Date Date .I-Card nov ISSUED NOV ID Actuat Images Date Cert. Date 13 2014,111116 A 501 10448829 27-2005 adm code properly repair the broken NOV SENT 201303107 PROS 4 2014111! 18 4951902 or defective intercom system In the foyer located 2014;11/18 . at apt 13, 4th story, apartment from east at Online south 2014;11! 16 689 10448343 27-2005, 2006, 2037 hmc: properly repair and NOV SENT 2015f01f06 4 20141111118 4951903 abate Unsafe electric wiring condition consisting 2014;112'18 of exposed electrical bx cable wiring at south wall at public hall, 4th story 14 2014311116 A 501 10448847 27-2005 adm code properly repair the broken NOV SENT 2015;03f07 4 2014;11/18 4951099 or defective intercom system in the foyer located 2014111! 18 at apt 14, 4th story, ist apartment from north at east 14 201411 11'16 505 10448864 27-2005 adm code replace with new the NOV SENT 2015;01l06 4 2014f11l18 4951900 broken or defective counter balance at lower 2014;11f13 sash window in the bathroom located at apt 14, 4th story, ist apartment from north at east 22 2014309,!21 A 556 10390661 27-2013 adm code paint with light colored NOV SENT 2015f01i10 6 2014109123 4919610 paint to the satisfaction of this department all 2014/09l23 peeling paint surfaces in the bathroom the 2nd room from east at north, the 3rd room from east at south located at apt 22, 6th story, 15t apartment from south at west 22 2014109i21 508 10390424 27-2005 adm-code repair the broken or NOV SENT 2014;11/11 6 2014f09i23 4919611 defective plastered surfaces and paint in a 2014f09l23 uniform color the west wall In the 3rd room from east at north located at apt 22, 6111 story, apartment from south at west 22 2014;09/21 526 3" 10390425 27-2005, 2007 adm code remove the illegal NOV SENT 2014f11!11 Page 1 of 3 4/14/2015 HPD Building Info 20 14} 09123 4919611 fastening key operated lock at door leading to fire escape window in the 3rd room from east at north located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west 2014l09l23 2014;?39ir 21 2014109123 508 10390428 4919611 27-2005 adm code repair the broken or defective plastered surfaces and paint in a uniform color the south wall, east wall In the 2nd room from east at north located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 2014109123 2014!11{11 2014I09f21 2014/09f23 10390429 4919610 27-2013 adm code paint with light colored paint to the satisfaction of this department the baseboard at east wall in the kitchen located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 20 14! 091' 23 2015(01l10 2014(093'21 2014f09i23 554 10390430 4919610 27-2005 adm code paint metal in accordance with dept. regulation the riser from north at east wall in the kitchen located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 2014109123 2015(01l10 20 141'091'21 2014f09l23 508 10390431 4919611 27-2005 adm code repair the broken or defective plastered surfaces and paint in a uniform color the ceiling, east wall in the kitchen located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 2014109,?23 2014f11!11 2014109121 2014109123 790 10390432 49196 14 27-2043.1 install the missing or repairfreplace the defective window guard(s) in accordance with the speci?cations of the new - york city health code section 24 rcny chapter 12. wg to Install 1; wg to replace 0: wg to repair 4; in the entire apartment located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 2014;1091?23 20 14! 10,? 26 2014i09,?23 617 10390662 4919613 27~2056.6 adm code - correct the lead-based paint hazard - paint that tested positive for lead content and that is peeling or on a deteriOrated subsurface - using work practices set forth in 28 rcny ceiling in the 3rd room from east at north located at apt 22, 6th story, apartment from south at west NOV SENT 2014f09f23 20 14! 10,! 26 Fire Escape 2.014iosi15 2014f09l18 10383470 4916632 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and regulations. remove the encumbrance obstructing egress from ?re escapes household Items at 6th story balcony ,west at fire escape NOV SENT 2014f09f18 20 14,11 1} 06 Fire Escape 2014709;r 15 20 14,309! 18 539 10383487 4916632 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and regulations. remove the encumbrance obstructing egress from ?re escapes household Items at 3rd story landing at rear north at east at ?re escape NOV SENT 2014109118 20 14,111,106 NW 2014.304! 18 20 14yf 04122 702 10214700 4823696 27-2045 adm code repair or replace the smoke detector defective in the entire apartment located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from north at east 1 NOV SENT 20 14,104! 22 20 141'06/10 20 14,104; 18 20 141'04! 22 505 10214703 4823695 27-2005 adm code replace with new the broken or defective mortise lock assemby at builiding entrance door from street to vestibule. NOV SENT 20 14704! 22 2014f05!05 NW 2013f09f27 2013l10/03 509 9991012 4701586 27-2005 adm code properly secure the loose and hanging floor joist above ceiling in the bathroom located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from west at north NOV SENT 2013!10l03 2013f1 1,121 2013109727 2013f10f02 508 999 1059 4700979 27-2005 adm code repair the broken or defective plastered surfaces and paint in a uniform color ceiling,south and west wall in the bathroom located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from west at north NOV SENT 2013f10!02 2013(111'20 NUJ 2013i 101'02 508 999 1061 4700980 27-2005 adm code repair the broken or defective plastered surfaces and paint in a uniform color at ceiling in the room from east located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from west at north NOV SENT 2013;101?02 2013f10f15 NUJ 2013i09i27 2013i10}02 702 9991065 4700979 5 27-2045 adm code repair or replace the smoke detector defective in the entire apartment located-at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from west at north NOV SENT 2013710f02 20131?11120 Nb} 2013f09i27 201310702 1503 999 1066 4700979 27-2046.1 hmc: repair or replace the carbon monoxide detecting device(s). missing In the entire apartment located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from west at north NOV SENT 2013,110f02 2013l11l20 Fire Escape 2013709,!27 201310102 539 999 1067 4700979 5 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and regulations. remove the encumbrance obstructing egress from ?re escapes household Items at 4th story balcony,front west at ?re escape NOV SENT 2013;10l02 20 13,11 1,120 Fire Escape 20 13(09,? 27 20 13} 10! 02 539 999 1068 4700979 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and regulations. remove the encumbrance obstructing egress from ?re escapes household Items at 5th story balcony,front west at ?re escape NOV SENT 2013;10!02 2013f11120 Page 2 of 3 4/14/2015 HPD Bu11dmg1nfo 2013;09719 539 9979695 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and NOV SENT 2013;11712 Fire 2013;09;24 4696113 regulations. remove the encumbrance 2013i09l24 Escape obstructing egress from ?re escapes household Items at 5th story balcony,front west at ?re escape 2013;093'19 539 9979696 27-2005, 2007 adm code and dept. rules and NOV SENT 2013711,!12 Fire 2013109,!24 4696113 regulations. remove the encumbrance 2013709724 Escape obstructing egress from ?re escapes household items at 6th story balcony,front west at ?re escape 2013709719 538 9979700 27-2005, 2007 adm code remove all - NOV SENT 2013709724 4696113 encumbrances consisting of household ibems at story public hall 2013;09f19 538 9979703 27-2005, 2007 adm code remove all NOV SENT 2013711712 2013f09l24 4696113 encumbrances consisting of household ibems at 2013f09l24 2nd story public hall 9 2013709704 579 9963633 27-2026 adm code repair the leaky andlor NOV SENT 2013110,!25 3 2013f09f06 4685723 defective faucets at sink in the kitchen located at 2013;091'06 apt 9, 3rd story, apartment from north at . east 3 2013;07l16 508 9905281 27-2005 adm code repair the broken or NOV SENT 2013;09705 2 2013l07,?18 4657259 defective plastered surfaces and paint in a 2013:07718 uniform color ceiling and walls in the bathroom located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from east at south 3 2013i07l16 702 9905282 27-2045 adm code repair or replace the NOV SENT 2013f09l05 2 18 4657259 smoke detector defective in the entire apartment 2013701118 located at apt 3, 2nd story, apartment from east at south 3 201307716 1502 9905283 27-20461, 2046.2 hmc: provide an approved NOV SENT 2013,109705 2 2013f073'18 4657259 and operational carbon monoxide detecting 2013,307718 devlce, installed in accordance with applicable law and rules. in the entire apartment located at apt 3, 2nd stow, Ist apartment from east at south 2010;05716 686 8426393 27-2040 adm code provide adequate lighting NOV SENT 2010707107 2010,.f051r 19 3935708 at or near the outside of the front entranceway 2010705;f 19 of the building and keep same burning from Sunset every day to sunrise on the day following a minimum of 100 watts of incandescent light required. . 10 2006f07f14. 616 6279609 5 27-2056 .6 adm code - correct the lead-based POSTP 2006;08/26 3 2006;07l26 2764482 paint hazard - presumed lead paint that is GRANT peeling or on a deteriorated subsurface using 2006108! 15 work practices set forth in 28 rcny riser from north at east wall, north wall, south wall, east wall, west wall, window frame from north at east wall In the located at apt 10, 3rd story, 1st apartment from north at east 10 2006707,! 14 616 6279611 27-20566 adm code - correct the lead-based POSTP 2006,:i 08; 26 3 2006107726 2764482 paint hazard - presumed lead paint that is GRANT peeling or on a deteriorated subsurface using 2006708;r 15 work practices set forth in 28 rcny riser from north at east well, let window frame from north at east wall In the 4th room from north located at apt 10, 3rd-story, apartment from north at east Mj I Services NewsaFeatores 1 City Life City agencies 1 select__app1ication.aspx Page 3 of ?5 4/14/2015 Exhibit 1 we - PM . Icatio LDG Number Builds-ms DEPT. S. 121 963 80131212002 Sc Code an Fl I Location Information mama l0:- applications. Hous- 102 SUI-mama sum Borough mum Block 003:: Lot 0000:: am 1000290 c.a.No.103 003.005 - Apt-100mm!) mallarle Lamm muse [-111le muum mm 1 . Wuhan-mesa mango mam-rm: WITIIQPMII (31217134257 Durham :50 am am. can: 005 - Mum Fl! mum-u? Olly :02: am. an: Zip 10001 mallow-phon- E-Nlall mammalian-ram . - Llama Numb-r 030005 600000000: DRE. RA. Elme D001?.me r3 Filing Roprdunta?w 000mm ?wrath-m Wipod?ldh 2. Fax. mam pawn, mm? mm LustName Fin! Hm m/uolnmmol all 00mm" (213)900-0000 BuslnouAddrul 290 mmr. 001-0: 020 mulls-sh: (115)020-3720 10!! 8h!- ZIP 10001 mm mm 53? 4 Filing Status Realm foul! 000000 0000mm Inmnl Filing 5, 7. 11, 120. 25-20 Review is mauled under Mich am Code? D?Amend Existing 4A [Imam 25 mans [11000 mums 0-7.0Amn-2mmu moon Examination or New Elm Approval Amondmont (FAA) 4A, 0. 24-25 El Elm Job 000: lime-rum P01, P001 WPMa?oct??ngfus? Gm gun as immanmmq El Pralaslon? Cart. of onpeuum an Elm Applicant 20-20 by I'm: I75 JoblProlnt Typos choose 000 ?pm WWMMIM Aim-alien type 1 M. 05-6, 0-10. lac-F. 14 a murmur! Typo 1. 01': ?to Work" 0c. 0-10 0 Elm: 00, 00, 00-0, 0 10-20, 22. MA P01. urea: um um: 12. lac-F. 14, 10.10. no: 130-0. 14, 21A :2 Bellanca In El?! Mn 1w- 2 an. 00-0. 0-10, 0 01. 00-0, 00, 22-23 ucnm um 01' 3mm 100.5, 14, 20. 22 Damion a. 1m Dual-annulus [:10me clumpnmu 17 ElChano! In Getaway! Use Elm GA-E, use. ell-0.91.. 10, 1m um 14 mum mud? nonm- (138:2oaacadoonw. 14, 10-20. mm. P01 um: um "oruqmanuusmum law-mm m0 canoe-arbour 10 nan-mupeMte UFB-Fucle'llng mo ulna-mm asp-sum m0 cause-0mm Genomic-Gum! 15 0mm El OTMAR - Man-no CE. 200 DOB lot-mac lumbar: an: 190 102mm 011?" PW1 m5; I Pianoiconotruc?on Documonto Submitted Piano mm I UAR-main! DDM?Damo?i0n (FuIiPlr?ll) DEN -EmruyAnoiysis or nus-mum: nPL-Punbino nor-mom: I 8 I Additional informition I .MWT Cost Cost Cost 83 inbu?dinu acmin 73500 H. 21:00 min l?ll'?'ml? is propoad an Sim! Promos: a. HR 2000 12. P01 GE Height: Em It. M50000 DHorizontai Additional Comwoiion Floor Am: 80 Total Floor mo: sq. It. In. ii. Proton! ind job no. I 9 Additional Considerations, Limitations or Rattlc?ons mm,? as. OB El Hm.? El Landmark LocalLleois) YIN I: anaemia-adv I: 'Liliio'E'HmtSitc Ruhio?vooedn?oni?oomm try-mu UmppodStrooi [3 Zoning Exhibit (I. ll. Ill. olio.) ON 3 Film tom: 9H Vida?nn Requesting legalization of work when no work we I mum?) if 9? permit Minions hm ban issued 90 Mthsiob?shmm Hy?, mammogram D- 9 Ci Compensated Dmiopmuni (lnallilioiliy liaisingLoftBoard El a Single Room Oowpancy (SRO) Mdiipio MW El [3 Quality Homing SJ GPO 0mm? II Filing halides Loi Merger! Ronppoltlonmont Site 30101}! DD Induou pom-mm mmovai oisiaridpipo. spr?dororlu'o suppression rot-tad Iyttomu SE mmapar?ddom??m?doh?hACSZB-imb #108,215 9K I:i sum may affect? by propoud work 9L Work includes ?ghting ?xture ondioroonirois, Emulation 404 and 505] SM cams) Rum Mam/samam GN Zoning Exhin 0. H. m. etc. a max. 4): I 10 I NYcacc Compilanoo Row air aw cone-Chaos-on- El Ei 'w ?wmm43?m7 mum!? ?It. 11 Job Description 11A Roiatld nos Job I PITCH mun EXISTING MINNIE. MIL mum *7 33!) HOUR. NHL I16 0! I'll HOUR. cum: TO noun. 0! 113 mummno. no: Razor-no. Mon Uni.- n. um 01!? PW1 ma 12 I Zoning Characteristics 12A Damon) 1m 123 11 Wt) amt m?m Elm Span-.111 0131(3) mm manna? mm 120 Imposed: Uu? Zoning Floor Ana 01W FAR Pmpued Lat MES: . Proposed Yard Data];- DWI: or Iq. II. Lemma 1? Front Yard ll anL 1.01m: sq. a. Rat Yard fl. sq. ft. Lot wan: It. Roar Yard Equivalent ll.- sq. It. Pmpoud Mantels: Side Yard 1 ft. sq. ll. Endosed Paidng?E]YuEhlo 81qu?: I. Proposed Totals sq. it. has. 1111. 0mm m: Exh?ng Totall ?1.11. humour Wall 11.19111 1L ?mambo one mama-J. I 13 I Banding Characteristics Wm WM ampemc 98-1015. 2008 Code ?was ow. ?Ru?on?d 13Aqu mm system. choc? out DMawnI-y Dem Dam (From!) Elm Usumstructmn [gamma-Pm 133 IPI-opoud 130 31111111me Family ow 8111mm chpuncy Gummy mm Ya 11: 3.11111me 3 mm mm 1:15 mung Propnud 13c Ouapancy Classi?cation? I a Joe" Building Hash! 55 ll. . a. summation mun Building Stones 5 1111111111. Classi?cation . . - Unit: as 13F Bummwaorlpmuymed mmummsm cm: Elzuoa [31sec Union-1111963 sham om. - mun: Appnc-bto new. Don-sun 13mm 300 cubic yards 15 com1meuon Equipment I 111 em out Description Elem [3m Construction Material: 81:: of cut (with splays): IL ?Fenoa Size: Inur I. BSNMEA Approval No. Duane! Io mm! 01111101: ft. [3314111011011 scam Dom tom 17 Tax Lot Characteristics Fe Fm Proucuon Equipment 5mm PrunesFire mm El El gamma El [21 El] nldulsamp- 19 Open Spam Pun Ara Nu Loudlnu Barth: NISIu-Chaucu?o?u YOINO mama-11mm El Urn-um mm I FloodHIurdNu Ina-bur: ?ll: 10! ID: 103mm 01111 Mg 21 Demolition Details ?mm comm other than mu devices to o- ?unawde rec 93306.4Clo-mum El WMMOWW 213121 22 Asbestos Abatement Compliance Choose one. - Thu mp0 ofwotk Inquires related asbestos abutment as de?md In the mum of I10 NYC Devil-Imam o? Protection (DEP). The scope of mu: does not related asbestos abutment as donned in the minions ofIho NYC DEF. Enemy: In (1s RCNY 1-2303?. 23 Sign Pumas: Type: El?maled Cost: 5 23A NW typo: Elam Elam [Imam Elimme 23A Total 8mm Fool: - . Ya No Grimm Height above 81:13: it, In. :1 Hugo prolomblyond mm um. [sown-f Loca?on: DGround ?aoof 233 ?w-Il Height show Root In. Wu" ?"1137 *sign 1mm lino? Wm. 80an by: II. it. 23c mm. ?mm. pm El Dulgned manageable copy? Hue. 230 Doe: try?. 236 ?ns. 23:! 23D mummn-mmx fL 235 It. Holmium 23F ?Wm? 236 I ?rommonu Place additional common on an AH form. Sn Guido forpmpormmal?m dyer-um mm unionism. I 25 Applicaan and Signaturn mindful-all W8. - ?hadron-Impala . I with? In?ammation-mum. I -r - -- -- ?Imminent-m Cl Nu landing and mutton 1 applications undqu 2003 me Al??1 I 15.! in" W4 - ?Mum. DOB Mort Ulu ll! 10mm 01111 PW1 [26 I Property Owner's Statements and Signature: mm:?mmuu Immebmmuwbmentmumaiheruumm pmperlypeufon?ngmejeborh Iundm?llml?lunlomddler mmummp?mhwm.mm?m (moses[jams Elmo UNYGHA y. Putnam Duos HPD um I Corporation 26! Gav-mesa [Jeannie 'umt or soap Imus-holder an album: mpmmomarin?m? II No Nmmeaup?nuzlm umn Rell?or?hlp Io Owner: nun Mm?armwenw zoo xenon: sum. the Steam: 105 am! we: no?. am: 250 cannon? State: In Zip: 11021 101mm Number: Min-563? Fla: E-Mel .cou Fallen:an Requeetahtement - In Manama-112.1 ?the m, smug?. El Regarding Occupled Housing . . Them-?memelngmemwmmumuudm cm" WWI: - Fax: - Wea?o?bn?m?ummum Chaplet! 3m4of1'?e Code. um select one mm Immune: Renew (memora- wan-rum area-Op how. Ruponelble for Annual Sign or Marquee Permit] Name (please prht): Rollins-lettuth mm forewh MIMI- Prm?de damne?led: Ownere ?Mon to: Adult leuh?ehmente Immemd Intendhme. en . anRi?lz-?l wmuwmmumum attenuated warden. Omnere Certi?cation In: mm 14 Applications [?lpp??hlej amulet: campy-Icy. rum. I awn-ml an for Mundme sweet Address: . - Olly: Stale: 2b: Telephone umber: Fox: 7/7/ '1 r/I Fro-Flor age-tune Due [East?e?mtez tDue: Veri?ed by 7 Dale [Initial Amount Paid: [Belln'el Duo: 3 8W. Celina-mm end Notes: Rehrence aux-her: raucous-?do In! 101m 01!" Exhibit NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT or HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE CERTIFICATION OF RECORDS DATE: August 7, 3014 STATE OF NEW YORK . SS: COUNTY OF BEN DEL PERCIO, being duly sworn, depOses and says: I am employed in the Lead Poisoning Prevention Program of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene of the City of New York (the ?Department?), have been designated as an assistant chief clerk and am thereby-authorized to certify records of the Department. In accordance with ??17~102 and 17?130 of the Adininistrative Code of the City of New York and ?4518 of the New York ICPLR, I hereby certify that the attached copies of original records of the Department are true and accurate copies of the records of acts, transactions, occurrences or events. made in the regular course of business of the Department, and that. it Was the regular course of business of "the Department to make the records at the time(s) of the acts, transactions, occurrences or events, or within a reasonable time thereafter. BEN DEL PERCIO NAME: Deleted ADDRESS I 102 Norfolk Street - New York. New York 10002 CONTROL N0: 2014FR02214 L. 1. NUMBER: Deleted ORDER NO: Deleted 14?! I In Da Start Time: End Time Child ID Number 4: I I J: Lt NewYork?Clty Department of Health - . and Mental Hyglene Mtl'vlty type: Healthy Homes Program Order Number Uri-[arm Cm {work Pumice Camp-[aim 125 Worth Street. Floor CN ss..New York. NY 111013 Primary Prevention Peeling Paint complaint Docket Number. LASU Number D10e14(LowAct) INSPECTION REPORT . - I I Child: (last) Home Phone Cell Phanc Work Phone AddressName: (Last) I (First) ?444 5/724 Address . twigs we ??imtii . I a .- -- 52;: am. turn. I (t apart-I ?In-qr. . F??titoitm?emmr olff-?L?: Project Contact Address Apt City State Zip Code EPA Certi?cate Number . Event Code Result Code Event Code Result Code EVent Code 0 Early Intervention Window Guard Sibling Ittfort'nation - 1 Acoepted If Violation Child ID Child Rejected No. Violation I Child In Child ID Rejected Healthy Homes Inspection: Yes a: - Fr. - Job Safe House_:. "if iti??irf?} for! ?rm . . tournietti?z-it Ti I git3.05 173.14tolcixA.) to 3m nmmxute) 03.99 - 3.15 173.14tex2xsttixtta} 17113910] 173.14 mutants) - D. 17344439133) ?immanm - 113.14tclt1mltixaa) I Healthy Homes Hazard: I. i Complaint Number: - .- - Signature) Badge Employee 113 it DateGRGENTE A ?eld representative of the Department of I-{ealth and Mental Hygiene?s Lead Poisoning Prevention Program was here today for an important visit. Please call us immediately ?t'(546) 632-6002. [In do] Departsmento de Salud Salud Mental, Programa de Prevenoion contra del Envencnamiento do Plomo, estuvo aqul boy pat-stuns vislta importante. Por thvor ll?menos inmediatamente al tel?fono (646) 632-6002. LP 105 (Rev. 02.!2014) Entry): PINK (Public) INSPECTION RESULTS - All OPHL Other Possible '1 Avail? Awaiting VW - Dust Wipes Prel?ous' No Cause for Action-No Additional VHEW iu'inlatior'l of Rules 81 Regulations MRI-NOV EV Building Vacant . - Sampling Conducted UGO Violation of Rules Regulations-Comaton Order an Building DannilshedNacant Lot PNEG Previous Negative Rosetta - NoAddiIionet mung VGDD Order Dusthpe Bunnies Required CEA Counseling. Education 8. Assessment Conducted VOW Violations Con-plied l.th by Landlord GNL Cannot Locate the Child Posted Order to Abate Nuisance VD Violations Discussed l-lt-?Ct Further Observation PVOW Pending VON - for Modi?ed Orders VRR Mutation of Rules 8: MESS Message Le? - PVRR Previous Violations numbered - No Adai?onel VRR by Housing Development Program RA No Access 83anan Conducted VRRN by New York City Housing NAP Ne Adult MT Refused Access by Tenant V56 Valid Supplement with Condition No Cause for nation RALL Refused Access by Landlord WA Wrong M61333 NEG Negative BHF Safety Regulations'BelngFeilowad Well: completed?Awaiting DustWipe Results nan hie Such-Address secular-ox Substantial Violation Compiled by HPD WGNB Won: mwlotad-DustWIPes-nol?oquimd mic Not Valid Complaint Substantial \l'iolalion (implied by Landlord W5 Wadi Stalled INS Not Valid Supplemental TH Tenant-Melted Workln OJD Out at Jurisdiction LISA Unsuccessful Attempt GODE REF. VIOLATION DESCRIPTION CODE REF. VIO 110M DESCRIPTIO 15:33inf?? ll-L _enet'attii, .I?i?n Occupant Protoc?cn: Oreo 3.05 Failure to comply with GonMselcner's Order - Fem? to no? Hannah? 3.0? Conduetln or sisdrl [n detzi mat to eith faill to tait . - Hamssal'y?pl?ca?l??tl?: a _e or "g a 173'14hmim?} Failure to postnarnIng signs see Greeting adustcra lead dust nuisance. "3'1?Mi?m Hummers-dammed belonulnus 3.15 . Interfering or obstructing Department personnel ?unamnc? i0 535? items I 173.13taitt) Lead paint prohibited ?3143?,? "m entrance ?apsienoicsure .. a" inj?emue? Failure to cover ?oors Failurete ?le Continencemant Notice "3 Fawmma? Commencement Notice lncompleteidelident. Faun? hm? mpam to mm work an? . naturism Failure to use EPA certi?ed time and Writers When conducting 3 ?wing or hazardous "medals mammal? - Failure to property perform daily clean up. 173.14th2HBm?aa) Failure-to use certi?ed limelor renadiation writ. militias) Fame to Pm?y Manda?? dam up marge dab? Failure to use trained workers for remediation work 1 ?Hum in pmny ?from "any dun up a, m? dabwork . . 173 ?(Filmialim'm 5 ?5 P3 Damn?, far ?Mdu?m Failure tc-pruperty perfeml deity clean up so] to until area Failure to use trained markers for remediation work {24-100 it?) ?a?mm max?). Fain-"e bl pm" Ewe supplies 1 . 4 2 I bb Failure to use trained due'twi a raonnel torrenadlailon 1 Ex De Failure to property perionntinai clean up 173.141c1r21relln] Failuretd use trained duet wipe personnel Failure toulall one hour prior to alerting ?nal cleanup 173.14tcllath} Failure to maintain records Failure is properly rriatisweeplren'ioue sheeting trundleitntlit?xwi Failure to property perform ?rst HEPA yecuurn .I - $.11 mums?J19: ll! I a "luwimwmm Failurelo properly wash surfaces 173.1-1ldil1th} dust-depleted ?Hum, pm?, w?m?mnd ?mum changing area separate from area surfaces 173.14 1 I lit open ?swallow {ex perform ?nal 1733mm mm"! Failure to rt submit clearance dust wt teats Machine Mil-rout HEPA attachment pm - - pa wan-tramp) wraps, la my 173.141d1t2?0] Abrasive blasting without HEPA ottecitrnanl I Heat gun cuer or paint shaming Failure to post warning signs- 1731 ?ma?a Dry ?aming Failure to pre-oleuniprolact belongings 173.14rax2jtcl Failure to cover ?oors improper use at point stripper 173.1dlellzill3) Failureto seal openings 173.1 3th sire} Improper use of tools or marital . . ln'oroper handling othazardcua materials "3?14?6?3um Fail?, to ?wrapan mm mm -Fellure to adequately dean up Br collect dust wipes Failure to repair underlying conddorls. Failure to adjust . 173.1 unusual) 173.14id?3?E) Failure to prep wort: area prior to commencement. 1 73.14ie?3XB) Failure to adequate clean up ?auwu? Faun? to a? mason tenant Failure inadequately perform clearance I .- nun: .. .: . . .DayCarei . - Peeling lead paint or paint ol-unknotlln'l lead content prohibited Peeling lead paint or paint or unknown lead content prohibited 47.44am} Fallum to abate pale ma?a? Failure to abate peeling conditions - . neurons: gunman prggent during fan-admin" Ghlidr?n during mm'??m WBIIB. chewable aurtecea. Impact surfaces etc. not 45.12rulrlv) Failure to Ictiew173.14 during Milt 3211? or 10% abated in a pro one? facility 45.12tc) Failure to use-lead flee paint on equipment . Poet ants? facility noticed based paint tree LP 105 (Rev. 0232014 NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE Lead Poisoning Prevention Program - 125 Worth Street, 5m Floor. CN-58, New York. NY 10013 Tel. 646 632-6002, Fax 212 676-6188 Page: of Mnspection Report Notes El Progress Report Activity Report Notes Adam-70; Nor? /k I I childID Number Order Number {grit Ere-T5613- We.? it? g: tit-'5 231-: .e 'Ti?kehm ?ew-Jere:- .9 5M . w?w? - rte-14 '?lma'rld "an r. ?Vita! ?Mme mam/Z Mm 5' mas/<1: 41 unwri??. I I Margmg) 417 .hLow 961K Pry/rm. WJM J?mc?lg? 49" 211 true-.6 rawra/ hm_ we? m4 4? 7i?" 'famsm?- - 4% Skye/E 5144/ k. 9/ M902, 4 mi; 3ka ?4 ragga" and dr??c; ?ll/o a 41v Many?g. . 1H ?emf WL 1414' Arc/4? 417 q? [xix-1:emu rig/arm 7?9? +7 ?/mc . MM LA . 12/8. Mam! erW Mam?4%, 1/11?: Mg? 5mg am WW 47m K/aax' a r445? mm] 5m?" .- 4 Staff {SignatureL/ Badge it ID Date ?opy received by Supervisor (5 nature) Badgetr ID it DateI 507! '1 Inspection Hepg? Note?ProQIeas Heparl INSPECTION REPORT: White Canary (Data Entry 8: FSU): Pink (Public) LP 118 (Rev. W13) PROGRESS REPORT: White or NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE Lead Poisoning Prevention Prorarn 125-W0rth Street, 61h Floor, CN-sa, New York, NY 10013 Tel. 646 632-6002, Fax 212 676-6188 Z, Page: of 3 [Z?nspection Report Notes Progress Report D'Aotivity Report Notes Address 1; Child in Number . I I 34m: Apt. Borough Zip LASU Number . Order Number I 1410/4434?; 52.31.13: g: r??ragf?weg 1 {Egg-u 1. It: - eye. -- - Spa-11? -- due/- wax/w . Lia-j I I ?agg/ 754nm: A Mu )M'mpi? ml. Omer ?i?hr?g?mac/ {15 I I. 4L 1 A/Amr ?2414 . . - "w 5114/ ma gorge/?3, OM adraga/ fairy Md?egka'?? - I 4ML I I I: r. daring e, .r - .7 I 4?11?Hz: - 3.: fl A .vidmLf/"m I We! dyr_ 1? 4?7 MM awf??imb 7e (1-1461; 7 r2 "In? a g? ML Staff (Signature) I I .Badgee ID if I Date copy received by . I ?aw??qu rm q/w/zr '13 be. Supervisor [Signature] I Badge# ID Date" 307/ 77 #2 I INSPECTION REP-CRT: Wh?a Canary (Data Entry 8. FSU): Fink (Pub?c) PROGRESS REPORT: White (RSU or Inspoc?on Report Hepnri LP 118 (Rev. H13) ~v - . Lia/Ve0395 New York City Department of Health Mental Hygiene Bureau of Food Safety 3? Community Sanitation Window Fells. Prevention Program 6 25-3 Broadway. Floor. CNSQA. New York. NY 10007 Phone: (212)442-2325 Fax: (212) 442?2529 Window Guard interview 1 Observation Report FORM NOInterview! Referral . Observation only} Lil/210 xv 9' In. 1" I Tenant. and Building Information na if- . nutmien-ll?? ~57?Ii557? I 7 5' n? 0 Manhattan 0 Bronx 0 Brookl 1 . in"! - I r' 0 Queens Staten island sonar Multiple Welling NYCHA 0 [Lava 0- Double Hung Sliding 0 Tina Turn 0 Casement 3? 1 or2 family home (max. 2 families) - - 0 Hopper O.Awning Unknown 0 outer . Rent 0- Sublet 0 Do yen and your children need medical insurance? Day Care . . No 0 condo ?niecesria usied you nines seguro medroo? . Landlord or Management A out information Mr I 3 0 . +woN Qyotz, I Are window guards or ?L?shaped" gSon las rejes de la ventana ias parades ?en tonne do YesiSi No 1. Missing on any or" all windows (except for v. .4 Fernando en aigunas a lodes ies venienas; means an league oonducen a la esoal?ere do incendios? 5 3557' ml?in go rain- '13 ?a 2-. Impr?Jperiy Installed Into the window tracks or not'instelledwith onemay screws? - -g_lns_reledo inconeciamente en lee pistes es fa veniana no con los de one form? 13119110 ouando usl?ed agiia, lire lnciina oontreellas? 4. improperly installed. creating open spaces between the bars. window. and sill greater than 4 inches wide? odinsteleo?o ineonectamenre, creando especiosebierlos enire-las harms; venlana.'y pulgedes mas de 4! puigades media? 0009 3. Loosewhen you shake. pull or lean on them? Re orti'ngA enoylnformation Tn? .. ?Tm; HA Map ?5le l? ig-argr; ayes Tongan I on; or 61+- ?air-[3m 1H- . DOHMH Hosp?athIlnio 0 City Agency 0 School 0 Non-Pro?t Other t; gum-- ?egg?: .mr war-7.5; -. . . . vow-tiff 0 Forward Referto NYCHA 0 Refer to HPD Kiwi-5 k. "wage u, a: .O No Cause forAction mom 0 Refer to ace 0 Refer to Outreach Duplicate Report 0 Leiterio Landlordrowner Ea ,3 I 0 other (Specify): WFO 61 (Rev. 909519150 =u1xap10 5 I 5 50 La - LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 125 Worth Street. 6th Floor, C3158. New York-NY 10013 (645) 632-6002. Fax: (212) 676?6188 Field Sampling and Chain of Custody Form for Environmental Sampling Page I1 {Child in Case [E?Complaint Job Number (JILRF): E'Check here if I A Ba 0: HealthAr tak?n?iL?r - Named Property Owner: MA g, 223?; IW Bore: I Sample ID Comments I Note special sampie conditions. locations. and awe w?gg?a?fm Room?ame Component Sample Area sample type. For'example: . - - 19 - Conditions: carpeted ?oor: bare 5011 Sample I (3 digits) . (Must match XRF room name) t. I mom windnw on left on wan I: back yard e.g. 0418044234001 I Type: dust. soil, paint chip, water [3 Hour I No Window quy- {75] . [3an I . 151? ?r {HE?Iogrow II 1. I, I Window hwy. 7 an.- 3W: Hg; 33%; . Ceramfo I rm"! h? ?(lag?ow 5111 I No Window Fi?-l7" Hm in; Hal/M 7 OtheFF-m I . Fran f3}, ;?i?gwsm ., UNoWIndow "007 Mm, Ha Wigwam IL I 1 WW #2241; K7 IFanc. MNowmdow I anther: Collected (Print): Mt?,th . Batch . I PHS Signature: I In Badge ID if: 7 I Date II I 4 Date Transierret?lzt . I If Translemd to: . I . Reason for Transfer: 1[ It I Date-nans?e?ed: at 1' Transierred to: Reason for Transfer: Date Transferred: - Nate spml?ed otherwise. dust wlpes and paint chip results shnuld be sent to wlthin-Zol hours and soil and water r?ults should be sent to within 48 hdurs. 13" 009m. WHITE (laboratory); CANARY (max) ?Hug-?9: 1- . "Va-25.1535 . - . . . . . . . .. . I Associate PHS I Signature: fr $0 I a?ea 125 Worth Street. 6th Floor. (IN-58. New York. NY 10013 (646) 632-6002. Fax: (212) 676-6188 Field Sampling and Chain ?rt-Custody Form for Environmental Sampling LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 03) M65ng Pageiofi 5 Child ID SOEEIVEEO 1 (II-131310 Job Number (XRF): IE?Eheck here if Jim, 5mg}. [3 Case ligamplalm Born: I Apt: no XRF. readings were taken in or Health Are-at! If? Name at Property Owner; 5" A E?m?t outside the apartment ?ofzu?l- M57 OwnerAddress: MW y'rk? Bore: rz?? Saniple ID if Dale (Montthale ear) --. Empfogee ID - Sample I (3 digits) 6.3. 0418944234430] Room Name (Must match XRF room name) Sample Area (Length Width in inches) Component Comm, ems Note special sample-conditions. locations. and sample type. For example: Conditions: carpeted floor: bare soil Location: window on left-on Wait 1: backyard Type: dust. soil. paint chip. water . . Ia.? Prim W, 4y 3m, vnm- Im- - m; ffwr' Mia {fa/wa Floor ?it? ,r 1.23 No Window Gil" ?lm . Fran Eli our I indow Sill Other: 3rd Ff?/ Pu?ft gametes?! Faun . Shift: CI Other: ?lo-Window Warde Ef?e Window Cir/rem It Dfaqy?l737 -aoi Shh; gnu-z- 43" PM hilarity [3 Floor Window i mthewc? I [21" No Window (arrow: ?zz?H- Im- am FIB-M 3'14?? Ffar/ ?3 b?qd?b?f?k?mh?: - 091? indow 5m No window Batch It: PHS Signature: l?r .. Coliected by PHS (Print): [Mm 4" . Badges: 33:51 it?: - DateColiecled:Lf/f+ Associate'Pi-IS I Signature: Transierzed to: 15. A1111 4. - Reason for Transfer: Reason for Tmsiel': a! Date Transierredzlf/ ii I Date Transferred: - Transiened to: Reason for Transfer: Date Transierred: Note for speci?ed othemlse. dust wipes and paint chip results should be son to within 24 hours and soil and-water results should be sent to 1within 48 hours. 1.9121 w..ow13} cones: emanva 9 :0 a?ed .1unun-u- - -- - - LEAD POISONING PREVENTION PROGRAM 125 Worth Street. or: moor. Chi-'53, New York. NY 19013 (545) sazsooz, Fax: (212) 676-6133 Field Sampling and Chain of Custody Form for Environmental Sampling O8 Htssaa Page 3 of Child ID 905513160 :oizapxo case B?Complaint Job Number (Km-j: Sampling Address: ?2 Nor Apt: Health Area: It?? 172%? rur?f421? or 10% abated in a pro emu? 45.12lo} Failure to use lead free paint on equipment 4144M Poet facility not lead baead paint free LP I05 (Rev. DZIZDM Exhibit Start Time: End Time Child ID Number ?nal! 0 paw . I New York City Department-cf Health A I 8 (4 I and Mental?yglenc Activity Tingle; PpucgramiLead LASU Order Number Order Number Cl Case l?f?orlt Practice Complaint 1 we? met 6 gagging?" ork' 0Q i [1 Primary Prevention El Peelin Paint Com lsint . - Docket Number LASU Number ?mum, 3 INSPECTION REPORT - . m- .525? Child: (Lost) Address Type Building-Type: Home. Phone C11-2Fami1y- ergo Dwelling Cell Phone Other Work Phone Apt Floor Borough Zip Code HD Name: (LaSt) (First) I simmer I. I 52% {wires Address/30 xii/Van 94m 2%334 - .-. "2:53:31 Company Name Project contact Phone 'l Address Apt City State Zip Code EPA Certi?cate Number LEASEEVENTS 'i if if"; 3 ii? 2-3.5 vz-r Event Code Result Code Event Code Result Code Event Sode ResuE Codb Early Intervention Window Guard Sibling information 0 Accepted [1 Violation Child I Child ID CI Rejected No Violation Child Child Healthy Homes Inspection: Yes Cl No Safe House: Rejected El. Accepted Family Currently in Safe House T- .1. [45 if i Job Paint: of XRF Paint: ii of Positive Dust'Wipes: #ofSarnples Dust Wipes: gf?ositive Other Samples - Type and Quantity (describe) Mb: 06113.05 El El 0 I73. El El 3.0? museums) 3.09 173.14. madman) El 3.l5 3 113.14 El El El El Fl I73.mandamus: LI - Humane) Ll El :E??Wir?i?l a. 173-14(cl(3l(A) El El El cement-Jana) Cl [73..14hx3xc) Healthy Homes Hazard: 3H Complaint Number: PHS (Print) PHS (Signature) Badge if Employee ID it Date: Copy Received By (Print) Copy Received By (Signature) Relationship to Child: Date: Superv' Supe or alurc) Badge ii Employee ii Date- ,0 1m; - . 307/ n77 alesfield representative of the Department of Health and. Mental Hygiene?s Healthy Homes ngramlLead Poisoning Prevention was here today for an important visit. Please'call us immediately at (646} 632-6002. . Un representente del Departamento do Salud Salud Mental, Programa de Hogares de Envencnamiento por Plomo. estuvo aqui hoy para una visita importantc. Por favor llamenos inmediatamente a1 tel?l'ono (646} 632-6002. LP 105 (Rev. 05i2014) WHITE CANARY (Data Entry); PINK (Public) INSPECTION RESULTS Failure to prep work area prior to-oomlnenocl-nent. AV Apartment Vacant OPHL Othar'Possible AVGW Awaiting VOW - Dust Wipes PNGA Previous Ne Cause for Action-Nd Additional VNOV Vloialion of Rules 8- Regulstions BV Building Vacant annealing Conducted vco Violation of Rules Regulations-Commissioners Order BD Building DerrloliahedNacent Lot PNEG Previous Negative Results - No Additional Sampling VCOD VRR-Gon?lmlesionere Order Dust Wipe Samples Required GEA Couni?li??. Education Assessment Conducted VOW Violations Corriplied with by Landlord Cannot Locate the Child POSIEIJ Posted Order to Abate Nuisance VDIS Violations Discussed HFD Hold for Further Observation PVGW Pending VOW - lor Modi?ed Orders VRR Violation tit-Rules 5. Regulations MESS Message Left PVRR Previous Violations nominated 1 No Additional VRRH VRR by Housing Development Program HA bio-Access Sampling Conducted Vital! VRR by New York City Housing Authority NAP. No Adult Present . - RAT Refused Access by Tenant vac Valid Supplement with Condition NBA No Cause tor Action RALL Rehrsed Access by Landord WA Wrong Address NEG Negative SRF Safety. Regulations Being Followed Work Completed ?Avrei?ng Dust Wipe Results NBA No'Such Address Substantial Violation Conlpliod by i-lPD WCNR Work Completed - Dust Woes not Required We Not Valid Complaint Substantial Violation Conrpliod by Landlord Wilts Work not Started eve Not Valid Supplemental TM . Tenant Moved WIFI Work in Progress?Inactive OJD Out at Jurisdiction LISA Unsuccessful Attean . I CODE REF. VIDLATION DESCRIPTION CODE REF. VIOLATION General Provismns Occupant Protection: Orders or ctr-Removing Windows 3?05 Hume to amply with commissionar's order "autemx?wi? Failure to post Noti?cation of Commencement - ?le-groggy or asm?nnsg-ln acts detrimental to health or tailing to take 173J4rennw?n Failure to pas! warning signs 3.09 Creating a dealer a lead dust nuisance. ?lmiamlim Failure to Pia-deanl?rolecl balancinge 3.15 Interfering or obstructing Department personnel "3'14?em Failure to sealvents Lead paint prohibited 1 Requirements 173 ?(an HE: Hm? "alulanm? Failure to. seal 1 Failure to ?le Commencement Notice "aumtmel Failure to Instruct occupants to avoid ?loll-r ares 173.14tcu1?B) Commencement Notice lnoompleteide?cient. ?(am ?Hi Improper handling of haze rdcus n'latetials Failure to use EPA certi?ed irons and workers when conducting abatement Failure to properly perform daily clean up. 173.14to321l?lti1tael Fault?? ?3 U53 EPA ?mad ?lms for lemlali?l'l Wik- 1n'14lax1lilmxaa} Failure to properly perform daily clean up of large debris 173.14lo3lzlrelrmno) Failure lad-.uso trained workers ror remediation-work 173-14l01l1illiliilbbl Failure to prepe?y pouorrn daily clean up of entail debris Failure to train dust wipe personnel tor remediation work iliiliilm) palm; to perform daily clear up an] to work area Failure to naelrained workers for dork (2-100 ii?) palm"; mm?, gruesome; Failure to we?re!an dust-lilies personnel for remediation 173-14l91l11l'il3} Failure to properly perform ?nai'cleen up work {2-100 Ii .. 173'14l'mum'maal Failure to well one hour prior to starting ?nal clean up Failure lc-use trained dust wipe personnel for turnover wril 173'1?1t9il1xl3?mhh} Failure to property mistisweeplrernove sheeting 113.14tcu3HA) Failure to maintain records ?awlemlim?mc? - Failure to properlyr parlorrn first HEPA-vaolruni WW Mathilda - 173-1ilelririlliililddi woodman-laminae; Failure to control Failure to properly perlonn second HEFA vacuum 73.14 1 I ll . Failure to provide changing else separate from Work area 1 (an 1m mm? Imp?? ?Ma?a? ?dams Open llamel?torcli a "mm ?Spam? "immumm"! Failure'to properly submit clearance dust wipe tests 173.14td1t21ll3) Heat gun over 1 ititi'F or paint cherring Failure to post vveming signs 1733 ?ma?a my Failure to ore-cleanlprotect belongings 1.73.14telt21tc: Failure to cover ?oors improper use of paint stopper Failure to seal openings improper use of'teois or material .h 173.14teiizilF} Improper henollng oi hazardous materials 173'14?d3l35l3} mm l" ?men? an? ?m 173.1dlell2?G] Failure in adequately clean up a. collect dust WIPES Failure to repair underlying conditions. "II-preps; gen-puma; access proman Failure to occupant Pmmc?am Tum?w" 1'33. 14leltallA} Failure to properly-prepare work area and want eeler Failure toperlontl adequate-clean up . 173 Fa; we to when? in team? 173.14teil3itci Failure clearance dust wipe tests Schools and Child institutions [Enter in Other Violations Section) Day care "Firm" am" ?dawn? Peeling lead paint cr'paint or unknown lead content prohibited Peeiingiead paint or statute! unknown lead content prohibited Failure to awe wanna commons 45-12mm} ?will i? ?bale 47.44lail5i Children present during remediation ?Emma?! chums? during remediation 47.44lb} Window sills.1lleiis. chewable surfaces. impact surfaces etc. not 45.12pm?) Failure to lollovr173.14 during worrl F282 or 10% abated in a pre one? facility d?JZlc} Failure to use lead free paint on equipment .4744ch Post slrrer facility not leadbesed paint flee LP 105 (Rev. 05.32014) [Eff/7- Child 10 Number i I Start e: End Time 2 It! I New York City Department dEHeallh .L nod Mental Hygiene 'l_ype: Ir Healthy-Homes Program EISU Order NumEBl' Order Number Case {work Practice Complaint 125 Worth Street, nzmj- CM is, New York(54 )m-e to Prue-or)r Prevention 0 Peelmg Pamt Complamt Docket Number Mum . INSPECTION REPORT 5 . 13 Tape I - - ..- Child: (Last) (First) Horriel?hone Cell Phone Work Phone Address:_ DNew Borough 5513:?? 3W4 A I 'b we" 15W is. Event Code Event Code Result Code Early Intervention Window Guard Sibling Information Accepted D. Violation Child ID Child ID Rejected Viololion. Child 1D Child Femin Cunehtly. in Safe House . . a Dost'eres: #0 FLosiIive - m1; I . ram337i -- of . .05 113.14 (on-3m 1 3.0? 173.14 3.09 mowing 3.:5 173.14 (ennraxixaal 1711361)?) 173.14 173.14rex2m - 173.14rux33m 173.14rcmuc} Healthy Homes Heard: 3-11 Complaint Number: PHS (Signature) Badge Employee ill Zia/M Copy Received By (oigoaturej Copy REceivedB (Print) mil/LA . Relatiorfship to Child: lam Badge 307/ Employee ID my D?m? Please call us immediately at (646} 632-61102. visita importante. Por favor lldmenos inmediotomeme a1 (646) 632-6002. . A field representative of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene?s Lead Poisoning Prevention Program was here today for an important visit. Un .representante del Deportamento de Salud Salad Mental. Programa de Prevencioo contra del Envenenamiento de Plomo, esmvo aqui hey pom una LP 105 (Rev. 029.014) WHITE CANARY (Data Entry); PINK (Public) INSPECTION RESULTS Apartment Vacant Other Possible for'Anaiysia AVE-W Awaiting vow - Dust Wipes Pitca- Fravlotls No Cause romaine-No Additional Vanr \r'lolallon of Rules 3 Regulations (VERMOV EV Building Uaoanl conducted VCO mutation otRutes 8i Regidatlons-Gorrunlesloners Order ED Building Derre?riishadNeoant Lot PHEG Previous Negative Results - No Mdiuonel VCDD VRR-Gom-rissionara Order Dust Wipe GEA Counseling. Education 8- Msessmen?t Conducted VCW Violations Couplied with-by Landlord CHL Cannot Locate the Child POSTED Posted Order to Abate Nilseeoe V013 HFO Hoidrfer Further Observation FVCW Pending VOW - for Modified Orders VRR Violation of?ulae 8r Regulations HESS Message Left MR Previous Violations demented - No meant VRRB unit by Houaing Detroiopl'l'nnt Program NA No Sampling-Conducted VRRN VF!th Authority NAP No Adult Present . RAT Refused 'Aooess by Tenant - vac Valid Supplement with Condition- NCA No CauseforAclron BALL Refused-Assess by Landlord WA Wrong Address NEG- Nagatlva SRF salient Regulations Being Followed WODW Wont'conpletod - DuelWIpo Results No Such Address Substantial Violation Corrle by. Him WONR WorlL'Corrplatad - Dusthpes not Required PM: Not Valld'Corrolainl WWI-L: substantial Violation Dorrplied by Landlord Work-not Started W8 Not Valid Supplemental Till Tenant Moved Work In Progress-inactive OJD Out at Jurisdiction USA Unsuccessful 'Atlen'pt cans REF. ascnle?orr . . .- - - 'r-u r1 owners-?19" occupant Protectionru- - .eeriririrlneftniiruefu . Hamminuam Failure to post Noti?cation of Commenoorrant 3.07 I in acts oeuirnental to health Drfeil'rng to take Failure tu'poitl warning signs 3.09 Creating. a dust or a lead dust nuisance. "s?mtem?m Failure to pm-deanrprotacl belongings 3.15 interlacing or obstructing oeparrn-ent personnel ?addmm?cl Failure? mi Wills 173.13iaii1i Lead paint prohibited ?autumn? Failurenn'proper entrenos I 173.1dro?1ii31 Failure to cover floors- 173.1diaji1XF} Failure to ?le commencement Notice 173 14? "1x6! Film t? a? 5' . Commencement Notice ineorrpleterae?aent. mm? awdmm 173.14lamu?i . Failure to use EPA time and workers when oondualing Intranet handling hazardous ?mum 'bmmam mm} Failure to properly perionn daily clean up. 173,14iojr2u31rixaa) Failure to use certi?ed time for repudiation work. 173.14feitl?li?irea} Failure to Draped? ?Mon.? daily dean up at lama debris Failure louse trained workers l'or remadiallon work 173.14ie?1xl?llibh) Failure in pruned), penal". dam, dean up or m" dams Failure to ?humming panama! ammo" mm ?auteumwxmi Failure to Draped? Perform daily clean up all] to stark area Failure to use lralned norkere I'or renerrietien work it?) Failure reproparlyetoeeuppitee 'lu tral a dust w] or .lor remedied - ?autonzxammhm re 0 use person" 0? Failure to 'pmpoliy perform ?nal clean up Failure to use trained duetwlpe personnel for tlrn'rover wort: Failure to wait one hour prior to sterling ?nal uiaan up ?lull-twill?! Failure to maintain records Failure to properly sheeting "Ev-?fall?lili??liwi Failure-to properly pedonn iirst HEFA vacuum 17:34:91? ?mum? Failure to properly wash surteo'ee duet diapered pamm ?mud-HEM ?mum 173.1didii?lii?i Failure to provide changing area separate tram work area "avia?mum?m Failure-to proportyinspaatlre?oleen surfaces 4mth open ?sm?owh Failure to property perform ?nal Inspection 1 A . Failure to properly subrril cieeranoe taste Mach no son armour HEPA attostrn'ant 4: mm Abrasive blasting \vitrtout HEPA attachment 113.14idiiziiDi Heat gun ovar11llD'F or paint ahern?ng Failure to post warning signs 1 ?dxzna DU sanding 173.1drax2??) Failure to belongings 173.14iak2iic-l Failure to cover ?oors irriproper use of paint stripper 173.14raxzthi Failure to seal openings 173.13 It 3 A to use ottooi or natan?ai I "p Pa 5 . 173.14ieii2HF) handling oi hazardous neteriaie Fm? ?N?Wa'l'ia?a'mm 113.14rexziro} Failure toeda'quataly clean up&ooilect 113.1drdir3?c} Failure to repair underlying oondltiona. Failure to adlust afal Failure to prepwork arse priorlo onmmenoernent. . . Failure to error relocation to tenant ?dang-I?m Mb?) DayCar'a {Enter?l . . . .. 1'57 . Pooling lead paint or paint or unknown lead content prohibited Pooling lead paint or paint of unknown load content prohibited 4144mm Fair? mabm men? 45.12tblrii) Failure to abate peeling oondiliona- 47.44iau5) Chum? New? during ramdragm - 45-12lblilli} Children arose"! during mediation 47-44lbi Window eirie. nails. chewable looser etc. not 45.12ibmv) Failure to fellow 173.14 during work or 10% abated in a pro futility 45.12Io} Failure to use lead free paint on equipment 4144(3) Post _5!?tl?97 facility not-lead based-paint tree LP 105 (Rev. 022014 NEW YORK CITY-DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE Lead Poisoning Prevention Program 125 Worth Street. 6th Floor. (EN-58, New York, NY 10013 Tel. (646)632-6002, Fax [212) 676-6188 Page: of E?nspectlon Report Notes [3 Progress Report El Activity Report Notes Address/0 - I Child'lDNumber Borough i LASU Number Order Number r'5.9.4'?on; a 1,1; .1: II 9 - {342; ,4 egg/'4 Staff (Signature) Badge ti ID it Date Copy receivocl by I - 33% I [1 417% Superv tore) Badg ID Dat arm 307/ N77 I Inspeotton Floporl Nolosmrogross Fleport INSPECTION REPORT: Canary (Data Pink (Public) LP 118 (Flow. 7.113} PROGRESS REPORT: While (RSU or FBU) I?M/re- 03% New York City Department of Health Mental Hygiene Bureau of Food Safety? 8: Community Sanitation Window Falls Prevention Program 0 253 Broadway. Floor. GN59A. New York. NY 10007 Phone: (212) 442-2625 0 Fax: (21-2) 442-2629 Window Guard Interview Observation Report :interview l' Referral . Observation (DOHMHI HPD only) I Tenant and Buildin information . Double Hung Sliding Tilt 8: Turn 0 Casement Hopper Awning 0 Unknown 0 Other Do you and your children need medical insurance? - - I gluon-eerie listed su nines seguro medico? No 0 Multiple Dwelling 0 0 HPD 1 or 2 family home (max. 2 families) 0 Rent 0 Sublet Clo?op 0 Condo pm 30 AL .. 1 our Are-window guards or-?L-shaped" gSon lee rejae de la ventana 0 las parades ?en fauna do . YeeISi No 1.. Missing on any or all windows (eiteept for . a: Foilendoen algunee 0 (Odds ie's ventanes,- menus on has qua conducene la escalate de incendios? . 0 Day Care 72557" ii: I. 2. improperly installed Into the window tracks or not installed with one-way screws? - lnoorreciemenle en las pistes de la venterle no inslelado con los toml?iloe do one forms? g4 ouendo Herod agile. fire a incline oontre alias? 4. Improperly installed. creating open spaces between the bare, window. and sill greater than 4 inches wide? inoorreciamenie. greendo especial: ehierlos enire lee ban-es, .venlene, ypulgedas mes do 4 pulgadas 5! media? 3. Loose whenyo?u shake, pull or lemon them? - information - 0 I DOHMH CityAgenoy 0 School 0 Non-Pro?t Other Femard Referto NYGHA 0 Refer to HPD 0 No Cause for Action (NBA) 0' Refer to ass 0 Refer to Outreach I ouplloale Report 0 Letter to Landlord {Owner I I 0' Other (Specify): WFD 61 (Rev. Mr}. Start Time: End Time I childmNumbcr Do . . - . allh /t 'f 41 - I Activity 'fype? Healthy Homes Programmed LASU old I Nay,? order Number . 125 . tr 1? Case IWork Practice Complaint am] 5 as $313232:ng or!? NY 1w? Primary Prevention Peeling Paint Complaint - Docket Number LABU Numb INSPECTION REPORT ?'11 -- ?Ix: idWeir .. *1 Child: (Last) (First) Address Type Building Type: Home phone 1.2 Family Wulti Dwelling Cell Phone other Work Phone Address: New A - Floor Borough Zip Code HUI xii (ll?i?ilh, rm.? Name: (L350 . it?) A W- Home Phone( 1 Cell Phne (of ?4 work 9110:5244 Wee-r1-u3'd-uh Event Code Early Intervention Window Guard Sibling lofonnotion Accepted Violation Child 1D - Child ID . Rejected No-Violation Child (3th 113 Healthy Homes Inspection: Yes No Safe House: Rejected Aecepted Family Currently in Safe Home -- i . . size: fees. e. - .t mjob I- Paint: of XRF Dust Wipes: it of Samples Dust Wipes: of Positive OIher'Samples Type and Quantity (describe) ?a?e?gt?i?p' .il *3 ii?? 3-: ?v i '35:"Ir e. .i-R?ema; .. .- ems v: 4..er gag-1L I 3.05 - 3.07 3.09 3.15 . 113.14mx3xc) moaexn 133.14 173.14mx3xo) 113.14tcx1xo) 173mm moms) nemmzxo) - museums) - mutt-Jinn) . Healthy Homes Hazard: 31 l: Complaint Number: PHS (Print) PBS-{Signature} Badge Employee ID Date: 494:3" 33- . 7.57 Copy Received By (Signature) Remmip to Child: Date: - a Sup wiser . ?nt) Su SI Ba gait Emp - a 507?eld representative of the Department of-Hea Ill-end Mental Hygrene?s Healthy Homes Program'leed Pelsonmg Prevention was here today for an important visit. Please call us immediately at (646) 632-6002. Un del Departments de Salud Selud Mental, Programs dc Hogares SaludablesfPl-eveneidn de Eovenenamiento per Flume, estuvo aqui hoy para una visita importsote. Por favor ll?menos inmedistamente al tel?fono (646} 632-6002. LP [05 (Rev. 05(2014) WHITE CANARY (Data BMW): PINK (Public) INSPECTION RESULTS AV Apartment Vacant OPHL Other Possible Hazards-Submitted for Analysis AVCW Awaiting VOW -- Dulelpes PNCA Previous No Cause for Action-No-Addltionei WDV I Violation of Rules it Regulations WHRJ-HOV Building Vacant Sampling conducted lice ?station of Rules 3 Reguia?cnsoOomnissloners Order BD Building DemolishedNacant Lot PNEG Previous'Negetlira Results - lilo Additional Sampling VCDD VRR-Comnissionsrs Order Dust were Samples Required CEA . Counseling. Education 8. Assessment . Conducted Vctl'll' Violations Cornplial! with by. Landlord GNL Cannot Locate the Child POSTED Posted Order'to Abate Nuisance Wills Violations Discussed HFO Hold for Further Observation PUGW Pending VOW for Modi?ed Orders VRR Violation of Flutes a Regulations MESS Message Lre? PVRR Previous \?clalionsnot Abetad - No Additional WIRH VRR by Housing Dell RA No Access sampling Conducted WEN VRR by New York City Housing Authority HAP Ito Adult Present HAT Refused Access by Torrent use Valid Supplement with Condition RCA bio-Cause for Action RALL Refused Access-try Landlord WA Wrong Address "5?3 "seem SRF Safety Raglletions Being Followed - wcow Work completed - Awaiting Dust wipe Results NSA No Such Address WGWI-IPD: Substantial Violation Compliant by HPD WGNR Wort: Completed Duet Wipes not Required . MIC Nut Valid Complaint Substantial ?elation complied-by Landlord INNS Work ceramics W3 Not Valid Supplemental TM Tenant-Moved WIPI Work in Progress-inactive Out of Jurisdiction LISA Unsuccesshi Mistrial CODE REF. I I VIDLATIOH DESCRIPTIQN I CODE REF. VIOLATION DESCRIPTION - Occupant Protection: Orders or >NW??liiy?e?lbitln?i?l?a?is- 3'05 Faun? ?my With camniwmrs on!" I "3'14i?3m1mm Failure to post Noti?cation of Commencement ms?ggmc?a??nsg acts detrimental to health or feilin? to tells Failure to mlwamlng dam aria peeling s'cuclcre teed dustnuieance. "amem?a? belongings 3.15 Interfering or obstructing Department parser-incl . ?73'M'mxcl Failure in 565' mi! Lead paint prohibited - entrance c- .- I .. Failure to cover floors Failure loseol openingsiwlndows 173,14rcji1jrn) Failure to ?le Commencement Notlce Failure to to avoid work area 173.14lcjf1HB) Commencement Notice incompleteldefldent. Improper handling ofhszerduus materials 173.14tcli2?A} Failure to use EPA certi?ed ?rms and workers when conducting I I abatement Feilureto properly perform daily dean up. Failure to use EPA oerli?ed ?rms for remediation work. Failure to properly perform deny clean up of large debris Failure to use trained workers for remediation wort: Failure to properly perionn deity clean up of smell debris Failure to train duel wipe personnel for remediation work Failure to properly perform daily clean up ed] to work area Failure to use trained workers for remediation work (moo I?ll} 1-73-1?ieii1mimddl Failure to properly store supplies Failure to grass trained-duet wipe personnel for remediation Failure In properly ?Brim final seen up work {2-1 . Failure to wait one hour prior to starting ?nal clean up 173.14fc?21rtaxltt) Failure to use trained dust wipe personnel pork Failure to'property sheeting 173.14io3l3nA) Failure to-n'ralnlein records Failure to property perform first HEPA vacuum 173.14relilmiilmcui . Failurete property wash surfaces . cancerous) Failurcrc dusldispereei Faitureto properly perform second HEPAilacuum 173.14 1 I II - 173.1ltldil1KB) Failure to provide changing area separate from work area (an Fem ?0 Pml?a?t? ?We'd? 5mm - 173. 14mm?) open Failure to property periorm final inspection Failure to properly submit clearance dust wipe tests 1 ,14 2 Mach! sand! on without HEPA itaol'i - 73 I "am, I 3 mm "3'14mum Improper temporary access protection 173.1etd?2JIG} Abrasive bloating without HEPA attachment KG?:ch 1? 1 Heat gun over Itno'F or paint cherring 1 Failure to post warning signs . 173.14 a Fail reto cover floors 173.1-ftdit2itF) Improper use at paint-stripper I ?an I 173.16ie?2?D) Failure to seal openings 113. 13(dx3MA) improper use of tools or material handling oi hazardous materials mm mm?? m" m' Failure to adequater clean up a collect dust wipes Failure to repair underlying conditions. 17314 a 2 peritoneum Failure to ecruer . . - innitlaHSJU?t] Failure to prep work area prior to commencement. - Failure to periol'ln adequate clean up "3149? . Pam? ?wank? [mm 173.14t?etlaxf3) - Feilureto adequately perform clearance tests 2.5an Mm - Day c'e're47-44(33111} Feeling lead painter paint oi'unllnown teed content-prohibited 45.12ltimi Peellng lead paint or paint of unknown lead content prohibited ?Mien? Faun?! abate 45.120319? Failure to abate peeling conditions 4744(535) Children Prawn during remadlauan 45.12lolti?} Childish Prelim! dillinii mm?d??unn 47-44th Window sillsI wells. chewable surfacesI impact surfaces etc. not ceramic} Failure'to follow 173.14 during workezn? or 10% shared In a pie Sitter facility 45.12ch Failure to use lead tree paint on equipment 4744M Post ?ttiQT facility not lead based pelnl free LP 105 (Rev. 05i2014) NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MENTAL HYGIENE Load Poisoning Prevention Program 125 Worth Street. 6th Floor. New York, NY 10013 I. 632-6002, 21'? 6-61-88 a (646) Fan: Page: of Report Notes Progress Report Activity Report Notes Address Nar?/ I child'lDNumher Aput Borough - L?SU'N'um'ber Order Number 11%? way - - sugar. . to ?r?h??t?gmiimi - 4?1.14/1: rid If. 141M I I d? MS I ill/aw: . Work, wt! .. . .r'rw 4nd Ha?: 4541 I . 4 . . Jr'? I. .1 .. ?Md/mom: Stam?gnatm) J. iglge?l?- ID 02% Cgeceivji?. Pt? Supe r_ at'ure Badge'it it Date' 507! 077 {rs/raw I Inspection Report NoteaJ'Prograss Raped INSPECTION REPORT: White Canary (Data Entry FSU): Pink {Public} LP 118 (Flav. 7I13) PROGRESS REPORT: White or FSU) mess HARD wl? WRITING. Complaint No. Inshac?an Date Time Inspection Sequence (frolzr?wM/NOTICE OF VIOLATION DOCKET 15m 1 f? I . both HOD - common conesecnon DESCR on . I . Telephone - no. 1:52:73. PF I I (U (A) Tags/m: +7 Mnhv/ 9.4 . an! LA magi II In 4 i ?In{Pusam?ppemlng?l?e ?rm? ifk r. I Mm: 850110"! m1. I 4/ . DESCRIPTION I CODE ESGRIPTIUN 1 I 1 .1 :50jar/76 m4 'HHcd . ?ir?MJ rm/?rw: J7 Im? Max Sheek. Ayf #2 . I DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND M?m. mums 863% pins: snow mmcmon. FALSIFIGATIOH 0F am STATEMENT MADE HEREIN is an OFFENSE PUNISHABLE um FINE NOT monem - a? (- Wit? $500 OR NOT MORE THAN 69 W5 IMPHISONMENT OR BOTH. NYE ADMIN. CODE SECTION 10-154. 9:530 0009.. A on 9mm? 3 I Launmuwfa/ um - Isu sue UTA. arr-13m (Raw. 9:13: HEELTH ?n was are aewa W7ij ?Zl EMSL Order: 031423762 EMSL Analytical, Inc. Customerm: 307 Want a?th Shosh?aw York. NY 1001.5 Phunal'FaR: (212)2000051lu121200-0050 cusmmerpo: 816201414004 a n? ProjectlD: 1?11": New York City DOH Mental Hygiene P110119: (545153243002 - Field Support Unit Fa)? 11% 125 Worth Street, 6th Floor cuss imm- - 1? Collected: 611812014 New York, NY 100.13 Project: 102 NORFOLK Test Report: Lead in Bust by Flame AAS (SW 840 30503170003)? Lead C112n1$anqr1e Description Lab 1.0 . Co?ecred Analyzed AraaSamp1etf 061314?1787-001 0001. 611312014 512012014 n1a <10 pglwipe Site: BLANK 001314-178?-002 0002 611812014 612012014 144 irfI '1'10 pgh?t3 Site: 151' FLOOR PUBLIC FROM BUILDING FOYER Desc: FLOOR 001314-1787-003 0003 611812014 012012014 120 in1 150 [191119 Site: ST AIRS FROM 1ST TO 2ND FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY - Dasc: TREAD - 061814-1707-004 0004 311812014 612012014 48 in1 - 560 0910' FROM 1ST T0 2ND FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY ON HALF Deso: WINDOW SILL 061 814-1 78?-005 0005 611312014 612012014 144 In? 31 Site: 2ND FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY FROM STAIRS Desc: FLOOR - 061814-1737?003 0000 611012014 612012014 84 in? - 38 ug?i? Site: STAIRS FROM 2ND TO 3RD FLR Puauc HALLWAY - in Dose: TREAD . 061814-1?87-007 000? 611812014 612012014 43 in" I 210 1.19111? Site: STAIR32ND TO 3RD HALLWAY 0N HALF- LANDING . Dose: WINDOW SILL 061814-1787-003 0008 611812014 612012014 144 '16 0910' Site: 3RD FLR PU BLIG HALLWAY FROM STAIRS Dose: FLOOR 061314-1787-009 0009 611312014 612012014 120- in?I 75 119111" Slle: STAIRS FROM 3RD TO 4TH FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY Bess: TREAD . 061814?1787-010 0010 011812014 012012014 48 in? 220 119111? Site: 3RD '10 4TH PBLC HALLWAY on HALF LANDING - Oesc: WINDOW SILL 061014-1?1?87-011 0011? 611012014 612012014 144 in2 2? 09111? Site: 4TH FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY FROM STAIRS Dose: FLOOR M. AF19.101ar1bf Miron Apfeldorfer. Laboratory Manager or other approved signatory Reporting Is 10 ugNtipa. The no data associated with those san-plo realms Included In this report meat the method quallh' control requirements. unless speci?cally Indicated otherwise. Unless noted. results in this nation are not blank corrected. This report relates tit-litI to the samplaa reported above and my not be reproduced. except In full. without written approval by EMSL. EMSL bears no responsibility for san-pla collection activltlas. - slight modi?cations to mounds applied Samples received In good condition unless otherwlsa noted. Quallty control Data associated with this sample set Is within aooeptable unless omarllrisa noted Barnplas analyzed by EMSL Analytical. inn. Now York, NY Allin-LAP. Adoredltad #102551. NYS ELAP 11505 Initial report from 0612112014 03:45:57 Test Report Printed: 612112014 Pads 1 of 2 EMSL Order: 031423782 EMSL Analytical. Inc. - Guatemala. NYHM25 007 110951 0001 Strost. New York. NY 10010 I PhoneI'st: (212)200-005111121232000050 cusmmerpo' 815201414004 .. [a ProieciiD: EHSA-14-9526-N0 New York. City 001-1 Mental Hygiene Phone: (646) 6326002 - Field Support Unit ed 14 11 43 I 1 125 Worth Street. 61 I00 CN58 Collected: 6118mm 4 New York, NY 10013 Project: 102 NORFOLK EALTH Test Report: Lead in Dust by Flame AAS (SW 846 [and C?enr Sammie Dm?ptim 1.01511). Collected Augmed Area Sampfed Concentra?on 061814-1761-012 0012 611 612014 612012014 120 in? FROM 4TH TO 5TH FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY Desc: TREAD 061814-1787-013 0013 611612014 612012014 46 IllI 200 119111? Slte: STAIRS 4TH TO 5TH FLR PBLG HALLWAY 0N HALF I - Doss: WINDOW SILL 051814-1737-014 0014 611812014 612012014 144 In2 42 119111? Site: 5TH FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY FROM STAIRS Fin-m Des'c: FLOOR . .. 061814?1787-015 0015 611812014 512012014 120 In? 120 1191113 Site: STAI RS FROM 5TH TO 61H FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY Desc: TREAD 0616144761016 0016 611812014 612012014 46111it - 190 [1916? Site: STAIRS 5TH TO 6TH FLR PBLC HALLWAY 0N HALF- LANDING Desc: WINDOW SILL 061014-1767-017 01.11? 611812014 612012014 144 in3 31 Site: 6TH FLR PUBLIC HALLWAY Dose: FLOOR M. Ap?e-Hor?ef Miran Apfoldorfer. Laboratory Manager or other approved signatory Reporting limit is 10 uglwipa. The ac: data-associated with 111000 rssuits Included In this report meal the quality control mquimmenls. unless speci?cally indicated olimwiss. Unless noted. results In this report are not blank consoled . Tris report relates only to the samples reported above and may not be reproduced. except-in lull. without written approval by EMSL. EMSL boars no responsibility for ootlsoflon aolivllias. slight-modi?cations to methods applied Samples received In good otherwise noted. Quality Control Data associated with this sampis set is within acceptable tin-Its. unless 001010.100 noted Samples analyzed by EMSL Anatylioai. Inc. New York. NY LLC-ELLAP Awodilod #102581. NYS ELAP 11506 Initial report from 0612112014 03:40:57 1 Test Report .0 P?nted: 612112014 3:46:57 AM Page 2 012 1-: Page 1 of 4 man: .. N?w (212) 676-6133 . i Field Form'fOIl' Sawmg I II a. .. . .ng Number-mt - - - ""??t?l?heck h'e'rell - . A 1.: Born: HealthArea: I - SamplinsAddress; ?arfv/K - I - ?zigzag? ?mofpmpe?yIm?Ig/w?. I I - apartment . - - - -oro: .. - . Ownemddress: ?/Kf I I . if . Nate.?peclal lucatlons, and Ont. a? Bar Room Name Com ponth Sample Am Sam!) 9 type- or e: JD Conditions: Ca: ._ted {loan-bare soil Samplre 'mamh XRF room name) ?lammh Location: winds: (in Ileit on Wait 1: back yIard 0418044234001 ?3 Type: dust.-soll. paint water '[J'FloorI I I I - No Window mt ?an[E'?ogr II '?NoWindow 1 Egg I 3333[3500; all 1 DNaWindow Marc. I I I ?1 'DNn'Window II My? . PPM f2 29 UUHZD ll 3 I OrderID:I031423762 'u?iHI-?ltl?rmI I a -[3NnWIndnw {re/mi [70' 2.52752 ifvgn'vr? rz? 2-. - ?ning?: n2?- w? - w. 9.- dawn-L3, 2 e: (1:454 Maw-H? w, Jar-I. - .. ?vlw . . ?3 a his?. canceled by ms (Print): PHS Signature: - I Reason to: Tragisfer: Date Transiened: Associate PHS 1 Signature: 2 I I Reason for Transfer: I I DeiteI T'r'ans'ierred: I Translated to: Ream? [or Transfer: Date Transferred: to: {of mm mm Unless speci?ed otherwise.'dust Wipes-and paint Chip resuus should be sent to LFPP withm 24 hours son and w. 'tsg adulfll sent to LPP-F-wlthin 48 20am. COPIES: warn; (mum-1): CANARY (El - LP Page 2 Of 3. 9315/? 4127- @7 dam/WW 7-507 :?raamy- 125 Worth-Street. 6th New Yam Fax: (212)-676-6188 Field Sampling Chain- Cu'stOdy Fowler-Environmental Sam pll??r Page 3r 6-2? "mm Mcompmm . 15mm (my: Sampling Adana?: $925? Apt: Bow: no XRF readings Name ofPtope?y Owner: [of were taken in or outside the Health Area: I -anerAddfess: apartment Bore: I msu mm; magmas; . Sam 133. 1 Dale (Mon . anyear) - Employee ID Sampf? ID (3 digits) 04130412344101 . Component . . O?nllh?nts Note special samplecnndiuons. locations. and ampleitype- For-mmple: conditions: carpeted ?oor: baresoil - Lacatlbn: window on Ieit on wall 1: back yard Type: 'd'ust, soil,- paint chip, water Room Name Sainple Area (Must match XRF room name) (Length Width in inches) I . I J71 "if v?l??ff?Flf'7?M Earth; E1 Floor W'me imam! No Window ?rm F0 5x174- 5H4: From Hat car Window Sill El Other: In No 3M Flaw? Pugh. Mag Whom- Cl Window Other: [gun Windciw 1.x 11 1?24" 2? Cam-'0- Prim Floor [3 No'mndow CMMH "6 11 ?r?k'n 5?51 JUH 20 ha Hmr_ wit/ft. #74107 1h? ?28- - mergeoar Window Sill Other: No Window All-.3. a i 'Collected by PHS (Print): .: an-?a?r ?3 PHS Signatnre: Date Contented; bf/ A Ass'ociaw PHS I Signature: Date'Tran'Sferred: 4? Transferred to: Reaspnfor3'1'ransfer: Date Ttansierred: go: Reason tar Tian?ier: Date Wie?ed: Unless speci?ed otherwise. duet wipes and paint chip-realms should be sent to within-24 hum-s LP :21 - beam: within 48'hours. ll a; I I COPIES: WHITE (Laboratory); CANARY (Elm . oraekim 03514-23762 Page 3 Of 4 um 03? 7?59 125 Worth Street. 6th Flag}. CELEB. New wrath-Minors 632-5002., Fax: (212) 676-6188 Field Sampling and Chain of Custody Form Environmental Sampling "i _p twink: .1. - .. Damp!? 1 7 mm Mme I NameoIPropejdyOwner: f/bfl" i?meme . - - A o: - . 3mm? an AIM SW5 NW 94%wa 1m} 1 3-311 Sam em! I . Note special sample conditions. locations. and Date (Mont its-Wear) Room Name Comment Sample Area simple type. Far-example: Empio ID - - en 1, width carpeted. ?oor: bare soil. 30mph? 35% digits) (Must ma ?3 ?00? name) Ingmcies) - Location: window on'lelt on.-Wall back yard e.g. 0418044234001 Type: dust..soil_, palm-chip. water . I - 'gg??m 5111 a mo Window gm? a Bother: .t . II iE]xFIErto?wSill memw fME?f? {737 ah.? mar . CW3: . 'U'woigdrowsm 11. If UNoWindow an mil amt/47!? ?tr/1% FWH?Zg-z?r??w xix 121' - Satin/?3. .u 'U?mrow _l d?/Yl?z? 1737?0/5? - f. 7? nagging [07? gumm- arderI'D; 031423762 H- H- I 7"??315:wu-?rw-Jr?. "hug- ?vnw?w- f-u -: 91 WM avg-54g - A ?rm?j .L rl 1- {Mr- ew 91-. 1 w-an-p . - . Hold. .Lf' -: 3.9-5- 513931 4W . I- 1-. ?z'u -. i? . r?l- .. -. if) Ma?- -E- u" 3: n" r2434. fig . 3 . am? :hm?prgfi?vfgibtfi; Collect; . ?th . I PHS Signaturg: Badge ID [7/57 Date Collacted: 4.4% Associate'PHSISigndture: -.Reason for Trar'lsler: a IDateTra?sfeg-re?dg-? If Transferred to: Reason for Transier: Date Transferred: .. Transiened to: Reason for Transfer: A Date Transiened: _PPwIthln 431mm. ten-emits] %6//70 Nate formal-aims: Unless specified otherwise. dust Mpes-md'palnl nhl'p results should be sent to WP within 24 hours u: 121 mammal. cams: warm Gabon-along; cmva Page 4 Of 4 LEADPOISONING. QN PROGRAM 1 25 Worth Street. New Yor?gkfii?gls (646)-632-6062; Fax: (21-2) 57643133 Field Sampling-ind Chain of Custody Fat-in for-Environmental] Orde; I. Ina?: 'm?oa'peaar Pagevf?of -%heck'here If I I Addr?ss: M1 Born: I Health Ania: 1%??sz Name'oi Pfoperty Owner: arm {my/{r Mauro/M; My xmga?w . owner Address: - no XRF readings were Iaken in m- outside the apartment 031423152 le 3 Date (Mont {Day?em} - SampleArea (Length 1: Width Emmowe ID - 30mm? (3 digits) In Inches) eg. 04 13%123400: RoonI'Name (Must match XRF mom name) Component :Gomihmts Note special locations. and sampie-Wp?- For-example: carpeted Location: window on I Type: dust, sol]; paint on Wall 1; backyard chip? water Cl ?dowsm El OtherWindbw nor Wlndow Sill Other: d/a?m Fran: Sl?awirq' duo Window my [3 Hour El El Other: [3 Nu Window [1 F106: wmdaw 3m [3 Other: N9 Mndow [3 F100: Window Sill [3 Other: No Winn!th .19 um . rug-cs "9m 'r "fr Fm?d'x?n'??div.14?s?. .-.. "fui?i??ui - '2 .55" 1L1. Collectedhy M6 Batch hr . . - y-n - m-uu uu. -. - .H?n .4. .. muf- max! Badge PHSBIgnatur'e: A 757 Associate PBS Signature: I Reason for Tran'sfm': 70m Trn?simed toz? -Reasan'for Transfer: Date Transierr?d: I . .1 Transieire'd'toz. I'Reason [or Transfen. I I Noll: hr: Unless speci?ed 0mm, dust wipes-andpaint-cl?p results should!? seht to within 24 hours - A Date mm (Ham'W?) cums: "p'la'bemtta?iPPwi 48 hours. Exhibit October 15, 2014 Samy Mahfar, Owner SMA Equities 130 Allen Street . New York, NY 10002 . Re: 102 Norfolk Street Dear Mr. Mahfar, We write on behalf of residents at 102 Norfolk Street, one of the many buildings you own that has exhibited problems due to your neglect. Many residents have reached out to our of?ces with concerns about the ongoing construction in the building, lead exposure due to construction, and insuf?cient communication with tenants. We request that demolition work cease until you and the tenants agree to a construction mitigation plan that is safe and transparent. We also request that this plan be communicated to our offices. In discussions on July 22, 2014, regarding the concerns above, you indicated interest in working with the tenants and keeping an open line of communication. However, tenants continue to contact our of?ces with complaints that indicate severe decline in their quality of life due to intrusive construction. Some of these complaints have led to Department of Health and Mental Hygiene inspections, con?rming lead dust exposure. Additional complaints involve security staff preventing access to City inspectors and collapsing ceilings in apartments. On August 14, 2014, a meeting was held between you, two of your staff members (Omer Zwickel and Galina Rozetti), and tenants of 102 Norfolk Street to discuss the ongoing concerns regarding the lack of communication from management on construction in the building. During this meeting, there were several agreements made between you and the tenants to address their concerns. Some of these agreements include a lead mitigation plan, providing tenants proper construction notifications, translation of noti?cations in Chinese, access to language translation services, identi?cation of construction workers with nametags, and consent to schedule construction work in individual units. We remain concerned that some of these issues have not been addressed despite your commitments to comply. One of the most prominent incidents occurred on September 5, 2014, when demolition occurred in a vacant unit. This work occurred after you agreed to cease work until a construction and lead mitigation plan was agreed upon with tenants. As a result of this work, you agreed to cease work until another meeting was held with tenants. This meeting was held on September 11, 2014. Our offices were also able to organize representatives from the Department of Buildings, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Housing Preservation Development, and lead paint experts to make sure any potential lead mitigation plans are safe and follow applicable laws. We also discussed the opportunity to submit these plans to the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene for review prior to doing any construction work. Although it is a positive step that you? re reporting that you recently secured an environmental consultant to oversee construction, we remain concerned that a permanent construction plan hasn?t been worked out yet with the tenants. We look forward to working with you to address the problems raised here, and to being noti?ed about the construction mitigation plans agreed upon with tenants. Additionally, we look forward to working with you to address concerns brought up by tenants at other buildings you own in our districts. Should you have any questions, feel free to reach out to any of our of?ces. Sincerely, Margaret S. Chin I Daniel Squadron New York City Council Member, District 1 New York State Senator, District 26 Sheldon Silver Gale Brewer New York State Assembly Speaker, District 65 Manhattan Borough President CC: Rick Chandler, Commissioner, Department of Buildings (DOB) Dr. Mary T. Bassett, Commissioner, Department of Health Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) Vicki Been, Commissioner, Housing Preservation Development 102 Norfolk Street tenants