On December 5, 2025, Governor Kathy Hochul signed Senate Bill 3799-C into law, amending Section 881 of New York's Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. The amendment expands the statute in several significant ways, particularly around permanent structural elements and the formal process for obtaining access to adjacent property. This guide covers the specific changes and their practical implications for building managers planning scaffolding, facade repair, or restoration projects. For full background on the statute itself, see the RPAPL 881 Building Manager Guide.
What RPAPL 881 Is (Quick Context)
RPAPL 881 governs when one property owner can access adjacent property for construction, repairs, or improvements. In scaffolding and facade work, it determines whether a building manager can extend work onto or over a neighbor's property -- and under what terms. Courts grant access "upon such terms as justice requires," which gives judges broad discretion over license fees, insurance requirements, indemnification, and time limits.
For a full explanation of the statute, the negotiation process, and court-awarded fee ranges, see the RPAPL 881 Building Manager Guide.
Key Changes in the December 2025 Amendment
| Change | What It Means | Impact on Building Managers |
|---|---|---|
| Permanent structural elements | Courts can now authorize permanent encroachments where required by code, including wall ties, tie-backs, anchors, straps, and underpinning | Facade and foundation projects no longer face the prior legal ambiguity about permanent installations on adjacent property |
| 60-day deemed refusal | Failure to respond within 60 days after receiving more than one certified mail notice now constitutes a legal refusal | Provides a clear procedural trigger for filing a court petition; eliminates the prior ambiguity around timing |
| Expanded covered activities | Statute now formally enumerates protective netting/sheds/coverings, facade and roof protections, scaffolding and platforms, shoring/bracing, monitoring devices, rooftop equipment modifications, temporary airspace intrusions, waterproofing materials, and construction logistics | Removes the need to argue that a specific activity falls within the statute's scope |
| Professional fee reimbursement | Courts may require the licensee to reimburse the adjoining owner for reasonable fees incurred reviewing relevant documents | Budget for neighbor's engineer or architect review fees in all future project estimates |
| Compensation standard expanded | Developers must reasonably compensate the adjoining owner for loss of use and enjoyment, including diminution in value | Broader language may lead to higher fee awards where the intrusion affects property value |
| Lower access standard | Petitioners must demonstrate work is required in a "commercially reasonable manner," not absolute necessity | Easier to obtain court-ordered access for legitimate repair work |
| Document production required | Owners must provide adjoining owners with plans, specifications, surveys, schedules, and engineering reports | Build document preparation into the project timeline from the outset |
| Tenant disclosure | Adjoining owners must disclose tenants for joinder in court proceedings | Affects how proceedings are structured when adjacent properties have tenants |
| License extensions | Developers seeking additional access time must make a formal request to the court | No automatic extensions; plan project timelines conservatively |
| Chimney/flue relocation | Permits temporary or permanent relocation or extension of chimneys, vents, flues, exhausts, and rooftop equipment on adjoining property | Expands the scope of rooftop work that can be authorized |
Permanent Structural Elements: The Most Significant Change
The most consequential change in the December 2025 amendment is the explicit authorization for courts to grant licenses for permanent structural elements on a neighboring property.
Prior to the amendment, courts could authorize temporary access. Whether they could authorize permanent encroachments was an open legal question. Adjacent owners used that ambiguity as leverage -- demanding higher fees or refusing access entirely for projects that would leave permanent installations behind.
The amended statute now authorizes courts to grant licenses for permanent encroachments "where required by code, regulation or local law," including:
- Wall ties and tie-backs
- Anchors and straps
- Underpinning
- Party wall improvements
The statutory language specifically covers "any demolition, new or existing improvements on the premises of the licensee or adjoining owner, including, party walls."
What this means for facade and foundation projects
Facade repair projects that require structural ties into an adjacent building -- and foundation projects requiring underpinning that extends under a neighbor's property -- no longer face the prior legal uncertainty. Courts can now authorize these installations as part of an RPAPL 881 license, subject to the standard terms the court imposes.
Building managers planning projects that involve any of these elements should notify neighbors earlier and be prepared to provide engineering documentation explaining why the permanent installation is required by code or project necessity.
The New 60-Day Notice Process
The amendment creates a clear procedural path that did not exist before December 2025.
How the process works:
- Send written notice by certified mail to the adjoining owner describing the proposed work and access needed.
- Send a second written notice by certified mail.
- If the adjoining owner does not respond within 60 days of receiving the notices, that non-response constitutes a deemed refusal.
- The petitioner may then seek judicial intervention.
Before this amendment, no statutory timeframe existed. Petitioners had to argue they waited a "commercially reasonable time" before filing -- an ambiguous standard that neighboring owners could contest. The 60-day rule eliminates that ambiguity.
Practical implication for building managers
Start the notice process early in project planning. If the project requires access to an adjacent property, the first certified mail notice should go out no later than 4 months before the planned start date. This leaves time for the 60-day window to run, negotiations to conclude, and a court petition to be filed and resolved if the neighbor does not respond.
For projects with Local Law 48 penalty exposure, this timeline is not optional. A delayed court proceeding can push a project into a higher penalty tier, adding thousands of dollars per month in LL48 costs on top of RPAPL 881 legal fees.
Professional Fees and Compensation
Professional review fee reimbursement
The amendment codifies the adjoining owner's right to reimbursement of "reasonable fees incurred in connection with the review of relevant documents." Courts may require the licensee -- the party seeking access -- to pay for the neighbor's professional review of project plans, specifications, and engineering reports.
This is a new cost that was not explicitly codified in the prior statute. Budget for it from the start of any project that may involve neighbor access. A professional review by an engineer or architect typically costs in the range of several thousand dollars, depending on the scope of the project.
Document production obligations
The statute now requires the petitioner to provide the adjoining owner with:
- Plans and specifications
- Surveys
- Project schedules
- Engineering reports
This document production obligation applies when the proposed access includes installing or maintaining structures. Building managers should coordinate with their architect and engineer early to ensure these documents are ready when required.
Expanded compensation standard
Courts must require developers to "reasonably compensate the adjoining owner for the loss of use and enjoyment...including diminution in value." The prior statute referenced "use and occupancy" -- a narrower standard. The expanded language may support higher fee awards in cases where the intrusion meaningfully affects the neighbor's quality of life or the value of the property during the access period.
What is not included
The amendment does not include a statutory mandate for attorney fee-shifting in all cases. Courts retain discretion to award attorney fees when one party's conduct was unreasonable. This is not new -- it reflects existing judicial practice.
What This Means for Scaffolding and Facade Projects
Planning implications
Projects requiring neighbor access now have a more predictable framework, but they also have more procedural steps. Building managers should:
- Begin neighbor outreach before hiring a contractor
- Serve the first certified mail notice well in advance of the project start date
- Allow time for the 60-day window to run if the neighbor does not respond
- Build court petition timelines into the overall project schedule as a contingency
Budget implications
The amendment adds costs that did not exist as formal line items before December 2025:
| Cost Item | Notes |
|---|---|
| Neighbor's professional review fees | Now reimbursable by court order; budget accordingly |
| Expanded compensation for loss of use/enjoyment | Broader standard may increase license fee awards |
| Document preparation | Plans, surveys, specs, and engineering reports must be produced to the neighbor |
These costs are in addition to the license fee itself. Building managers who receive project estimates should verify that the estimate accounts for these items.
Insurance implications for permanent structural elements
Permanent structural elements authorized under the new provisions -- wall ties, underpinning, anchors -- may require additional insurance coverage. Standard commercial general liability policies may not automatically cover permanent installations on adjacent property. Verify coverage with the contractor and legal counsel before the work begins.
Contractor selection implications
Choose contractors experienced with RPAPL 881 access situations and adjacent property work. Contractors who understand this framework can provide documentation, manage access schedules, and complete work within the licensed access period -- reducing the duration and therefore the total cost of the license.
The guide on verifying NYC scaffolding contractors covers the due diligence process for evaluating contractor qualifications. The pre-installation checklist covers the full pre-project sequence.
Section 882 and State Entity Exemptions
New Section 882: Severability
The amendment adds Section 882, a severability clause providing that if any provision of the amended statute is found invalid, the remaining provisions remain enforceable. This is standard legislative drafting practice. Its inclusion signals that the legislature anticipated potential constitutional challenges to the permanent structural element provisions.
MTA exemption
Courts "shall not grant a license" when the Metropolitan Transportation Authority owns, leases, or occupies the adjoining property. This exemption was included in the original bill as signed in December 2025.
Expansion to all state entities (February 2026)
A subsequent revision in February 2026 broadened the exemption from the MTA alone to "any department, division, agency, office, public authority, or public benefit corporation of New York State."
This is a significant expansion. Building managers planning projects adjacent to any state-owned or state-occupied property -- a transit facility, a state office building, a public authority facility -- should confirm whether RPAPL 881 applies before beginning the access process. If the adjacent property falls within this exemption, RPAPL 881 cannot be used to obtain a court-ordered license.
In these situations, building managers must pursue other access mechanisms, which will likely require direct negotiation with the relevant state entity outside the RPAPL 881 framework.
Action Items for Building Managers
- Review existing neighbor access agreements in light of the new provisions, particularly the expanded compensation standard and document production requirements.
- Budget for professional review fees in all future project estimates where neighbor access may be required.
- Begin the neighbor outreach and certified mail notice process earlier in the project timeline -- at least 4 months before the planned access date.
- Ensure contractors are experienced with RPAPL 881 access situations and can provide the required documentation.
- Confirm whether adjacent properties involve state entities before planning access -- the exemption now covers all New York State departments, agencies, authorities, and public benefit corporations, not only the MTA.
Search the contractor registry to compare NYC scaffolding contractors by borough and permit volume before beginning the license process.
Frequently Asked Questions
What changed in the RPAPL 881 amendment?
Senate Bill 3799-C, signed December 5, 2025, made several changes: courts can now authorize permanent structural elements (wall ties, underpinning, anchors) where required by code; failure to respond to two certified mail notices within 60 days constitutes a deemed refusal; the list of covered activities was formally enumerated; courts may require the licensee to reimburse the neighbor's professional review fees; the access standard was lowered from absolute necessity to "commercially reasonable manner"; and the compensation standard was expanded to include diminution in value.
Can courts now authorize permanent structural elements on neighbor property?
Yes, under the amended statute. Courts can authorize permanent encroachments "where required by code, regulation or local law," including wall ties, tie-backs, anchors, straps, underpinning, and party wall improvements. This is a significant expansion -- prior to December 2025, whether courts could authorize permanent encroachments was an open legal question.
Do I have to pay my neighbor's professional review fees under the new RPAPL 881?
Courts may require the licensee to reimburse the adjoining owner for reasonable professional fees incurred in reviewing project documents. This is not automatic -- the court exercises discretion -- but building managers should treat it as a likely cost in any project where the neighbor engages an engineer or architect to review the plans.
When did the RPAPL 881 amendments take effect?
Senate Bill 3799-C was signed on December 5, 2025, and took effect that date. A subsequent revision expanding the state entity exemption from the MTA to all New York State agencies took effect in February 2026.
Does the amended RPAPL 881 apply if my neighbor is a state agency?
No. Courts cannot grant an RPAPL 881 license when the adjoining property is owned, leased, or occupied by any department, division, agency, office, public authority, or public benefit corporation of New York State. This exemption was expanded in February 2026 from the original MTA-only exemption. If your adjacent property involves any state entity, you will need to pursue access through other means outside the RPAPL 881 framework.