STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.:
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
On March 21, 1988, the above-named petitioner-tenant filed a
petition for administrative review (PAR) of an order issued on
February 17, 1988, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the
housing accommodation known as 300 East 51st Street, Apartment
12-B, New York, New York, wherein the Administrator determined that
the conditions giving rise to a rent reduction under order dated
January 31, 1986, had been corrected and services restored, and
ordered a rent restoration.
The Commissioner has reviewed all of the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the administrative appeal.
This proceeding was commenced by the filing of an application to
restore rent dated June 23, 1987.
A copy of the owner's application was served on the tenant who
filed answers dated June 28 and September 2, 1987. The tenant
opposed the owner's application on the basis that the size of the
storage area in the basement has been diminished by the installa-
tion of gas service equipment, that the storage area remaining
cannot legally be used as storage space, and that there are
discrepancies in the record as to the actual size of the storage
Thereafter, on November 5, 1987 and January 5, 1988, inspections of
the premises disclosed that the tenant's windows had been repaired
and described the size and type of storage space available for the
tenants in the basement, resulting in the order herein appealed.
In the PAR the tenant contends that part of the storage space in
the basement that was added to compensate for the part lost to the
gas installation, is a locker room for employees and is not
comparable to the former space. The tenant further contends that
the part of the original storage area remaining after the gas
installation cannot legally be used for storage and that it is a
hazard to do so. The tenant requests a hearing to verify disputed
facts and law. The tenant raises no issue with respect to the
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
In order for a rent restoration application to be granted, it must
be established that the conditions cited in the rent reduction
order have been corrected. In this case, the rent reduction order
described the services not being maintained as the discontinuance
of basement storage space and repairs needed to the apartment
Setting aside the finding as to the apartment windows which have
been serviced and which provide no issue in this administrative
review proceeding, the only relevant inquiry in this proceeding is
whether comparable basement storage space has been restored.
In a compliance proceeding initiated after the rent reduction order
was issued, an inspection conducted by a Division of Housing and
Community Renewal (DHCR) inspector confirmed that the space lost in
the gas conversion had been restored and the owner was directed to
apply for restoration.
The inspection report, which included a diagram of the storage area
with measurements confirmed that there are now two rooms for
storage, that the second room compensates for the space lost in the
first room due to construction, a space which according to the
diagram is 7 foot square. Another inspection conducted after the
application to restore rent was filed also confirms these findings
as well as the fact that the second room is also used by building
employees as a locker room.
The Commissioner rejects the tenant's contention that the addi-
tional room is not comparable storage space as the record discloses
that at least two inspections have determined that the new space
exceeds in area the space lost to the gas installation.
The tenant's contention that the remaining space in the first
storage room cannot be legally used as storage is based on a
statement of the owner several years earlier that after the gas
installation, the owner was informed by utility and/or municipal
workers that the remaining or adjacent space could only by used for
gas apparatus. The tenant merely challenges the owner on his own
statement that after saying in prior proceedings that the space
could not be used, is doing just that. The tenant submits no
evidence on this issue and there is no evidence in the record that
the stated restriction applies to other than the 7 x 7 ft. area
concluded by the Division's inspection as being no longer available
There is no requirement in applicable law which requires that a
hearing be conducted before an order of this type can be issued.
The Commissioner finds that the Administrator's determination was
properly based on the entire record including the results of on-
site physical inspections and that the order hereunder review was
correctly issued and is affirmed.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same hereby, is
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA