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.: CL110172RO
39-60 54TH STREET OWNER'S CORP. RENT
C/0 GABRIEL MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
AND REVOKING RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
On December 22, 1988 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued on November 21, 1988. The order concerned
housing accommodations known as Apt. 1B located at 39-60 54th
Street, Woodside, N.Y. The Administrator issued an order denying
the tenant's building-wide services complaint, ruling that the
owner was not required to maintain a doorman or storage space but
directing the owner to restore all lobby furniture removed prior to
renovation of the subject lobby within 20 days of the order or show
cause why the subject owner can not. No rent reduction was
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
This proceeding was commenced on April 19, 1988 when one
tenant of this 235 unit building filed a Statement of Complaint of
Decrease in Building-Wide Services and alleged that the owner was
not maintaining certain building-wide services.
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded
an opportunity to respond. A response was filed on June 7, 1988
wherein the Administrator was notified that the building was under
cooperative ownership, that the doorman's hours have not been
changed, that the lobby is being renovated, that there is and has
always been a service entrance to the building and that a bicycle
room is not a base date service required to be provided. The party
filing the response stated that it was not the manager of the
building and would forward the complaint to the proper manager.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
building. The inspection was conducted on September 21, 1988 and
revealed that there was no evidence of a doorman, lobby furniture
or storage space.
The Administrator issued the order hereunder review on
November 21, 1988. The tenant's application was denied based on
the inspection and evidence in the record which revealed that
doorman and storage space are not required services. The
Administrator also directed the owner to replace the lobby
furniture that had been removed.
On appeal the owner states that the lobby has been redecorated
to the satisfaction of the tenants. The petition was served on the
tenant on January 30, 1989.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted
and the order hereunder review should be revoked.
The tenant's complaint alleged that furniture was being
removed from the lobby. The owner answered that the lobby was
being renovated and the inspector reported that there was no
furniture at the time of the inspection. There was never any
investigation by the Administrator as to what, if any, furniture
was formerly located in the lobby and, therefore, no notice to the
owner regarding the number and type of pieces to be restored.
Moreover, it is evident from the record that the lobby was in a
state of renovation which may have necessitated the temporary
removal of all furniture. Therefore, the order hereunder review
should be revoked.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code it
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
granted, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and the same
hereby is, revoked.
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA