DHCR Decisions          BG110216RT                                STATE OF NEW YORK                    DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL                          OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION                                   GERTZ PLAZA                             92-31 UNION HALL STREET                             JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433      ------------------------------------X      IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE    ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW      APPEAL OF                              DOCKET NO.: BG110216RT           Mildred Balzano,                  DRO DOCKET NO.: AC110075RV                                             TENANT: Mildred Balzano                                         PETITIONER          ------------------------------------X                                       ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW      On July 24, 1987, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a Petition for      Administrative Review against an order issued on June 24, 1987, by a      Rent Administrator concerning the housing accommodations known as            39-07 208th Street, Bayside, New York, Apartment No. 16, wherein the      Rent Administrator dismissed the tenant's complaint.      The Administrative Appeal is being determined pursuant to the provisions      of Section 2526.1 of the Rent Stabilization Code.      The issue herein is whether the Rent Administrator's order was      warranted.      The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and has      carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the issue      raised by the administrative appeal.        This proceeding was originally commenced on January 15, 1986 by the      filing of a complaint of the owner's failure to issue a renewal lease.        The tenant stated that she had assumed occupancy on January 15, 1975      pursuant to a two year lease at a rent of $245.00 per month.  The      complaint further stated that the owner has expressed an intention to      withdraw the subject apartment from the housing market in order to      demolish the building and construct new dwelling units.      In its answer, the owner stated that it had already submitted an      application with the DHCR to withdraw the subject apartment from the      rental market under Docket Number OI011001DI.      In June 24, 1987, the Rent Administrator issued the order appealed      herein which stated that the issue of the tenant's right to a renewal      lease would be resolved upon the issuance of the order under Docket      Number OI011001DI concerning the owner's application to recover the      unit, and that both tenant and owner would be advised of that      determination.      On June 20, 1989, a Rent Administrator issued an order under Docket      Number OI011001DI wherein it was determined to grant the owner's      application to recover twenty six occupied units, including the subject      apartment, demolishing them to convert them into thirteen one-family      dwellings, as conditioned upon the owner's compliance with certain          BG110216RT      relocation and stipend provisions.      None of the tenants affected by the order, including the complainant in      this proceeding, has appealed the order.  The owner's petition of the      order, relating only to the relocation conditions, was denied by the      Commissioner in an opinion issued on June 12, 1990.      The tenant's petition was filed on July 24, 1987, and has not been      amended or supplemented since the issuance of the order granting the      owner's application.  In her petition, the tenant contends that the      Administrator's determination was incorrect, and cited another DHCR      order, under Docket Number AB110010RV, which had ordered the same owner      to issue a renewal lease to a tenant in another unit.        The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be denied.      The instant proceeding was commenced when the petitioner-tenant filed a      complaint alleging the owner's failure to issue her a renewal lease.        The administrative order appealed herein dismissed the tenant's      complaint based on the owner's application to withdraw 26 units,      including the complainant's, from the market.  The Rent Administrator      was correct in terminating the tenant's proceeding, as the only issue      therein would of necessity be resolved in the order based on the owner's      application.  Although the application was still being processed at the      time the tenant filed her petition, the underlying issue of this appeal      has since been resolved by the administrative order granting the owner's      application and the expiration of the designated period for the filing      of an appeal without challenge (the owner's appeal of the order is      unrelated to the lease-renewal issue).      It is further noted that, based on the latest registrations filed by the      owner, it appears that the owner has not acted on the original plan.        Registration information indicates that the complaining tenant has in      fact been issued a renewal lease, but one which terminated on December      31, 1992.  If the tenant is still occupying the subject apartment and      has not in fact received a renewal lease, this order and opinion is      issued without prejudice to the tenant's right to file a new complaint      of the owner's failure to offer a renewal lease.      THEREFORE, in accordance with Rent Stabilization Law and Code, it is      ORDERED, that the petition be, and the same hereby is denied, and that      the Administrator's order be and the same hereby is affirmed.      ISSUED:                                                                                                        JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA                                      Deputy Commissioner