ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DC 410262 RO

            
                                  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.:              
                                                 DC 410262 RO                
                               
                                              :  
                                                 
                                                 RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S    
                                                 DOCKET NO.:                 
                                                 CF 410001 B
                McALPIN HOTEL                              
                BY GRENADIER REALTY                                  

                              PETITIONER      : 
          ------------------------------------X                             

            ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
                IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRIOR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER'S ORDER
                            REVOKING RENT REDUCTION ORDER

               On March 14, 1989, the above-named petitioner-owner filed a 
          petition for administrative review of an order issued on March 3, 
          1989, by the Rent Administrator, concerning the housing 
          accommodation known as 50 West 34th Street, New York, New York, 
          also known as the McAlpin Hotel, wherein the Administrator 
          determined the tenant's complaint of building wide service 
          decreases.

               The challenged order under Docket No. CF 410001-B directed 
          rent reductions based on inspections conducted on November 23, 1988 
          and December 20, 1988 that also reflected that two (2) of the six 
          (6) elevators were out of service due to renovation. 

               The November 23, 1988 inspection report also cited torn 
          wallpaper due to vandalism and some minor loose hallway molding, 
          but that work was in progress to install new wall covering.  The 
          December 20, 1988 inspection report cited no wallpaper defects but 
          was silent as to the wall molding.  Other complaints of decreased 
          services were found to have been addressed or were not 
          substantiated.

















          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DC 410262 RO

               On December 23, 1992, the Deputy Commissioner issued an order 
          per Docket Nos. DC 430263 RO/DC 410535 RO/DC 430315, wherein the 
          Commissioner granted the owner's administrative appeals requesting 
          that the rent reduction granted per Docket No. CF 420001 B, the 
          order herein under appeal, as well as the rent reduction granted 
          per Docket No. CF 430058 be revoked.

               The Commissioner found that the owner had established that the 
          elevator interruptions were due to a modernization project at a 
          substantial cost to the owner, albeit pursuant to an order of the 
          Court independent of these proceedings, and concurred that the work 
          was scheduled in stages so as to maintain adequate elevator service 
          at all times.

               The Commissioner also pointed out that the inspectors reported 
          that the elevators that were operating were not defective, and that 
          adequate elevator service was being maintained by four (4) 
          elevators while the two (2) other units that served the same areas 
          were being upgraded.

               The Commissioner further noted that service interruptions 
          arising in the course of maintenance and upgrading are not, absent 
          other factors, sufficient grounds for imposing rent reductions  
          normally imposed when maintenance and repairs are lacking or 
          inadequate.  Based on a finding that the owner had undertaken a 
          major elevator project to modernize the equipment, the Commissioner 
          concluded that the owner should not have been penalized because two 
          (2) units were inoperative due to the upgrading.
            
               The Commissioner also revoked the loose molding condition as 
          a basis for rent reduction.  The Commissioner pointed out that 
          while the December 20, 1988 inspection per Docket No. CF 410001-B 
          was silent concerning the minor loose hallway wall molding reported 
          per the November 23, 1988 inspection, as the hallway renovations 
          under way on November 23, 1988 had been completed by December 20, 
          1988, the record suggested the loose molding condition was also 
          corrected.  It was further noted that there was no indication in 
          the record that any tenants were adversely affected. 

               The petition herein names only one tenant, rent stabilized, 
          not included by the owner in the related appeals.

               In accordance with the Commissioner's findings in the December 
          23, 1992 order, the owner's appeal is hereby granted.  The rent 
          reduction granted to rent stabilized tenants per Docket No. CF 
          410001 B is hereby revoked.  In fact, only one rent stabilized 
          tenant is indicated in the appeal and below, the registered 
          occupant of Apartment No. 15C3.


               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent 
          Stabilization Law and Code, it is






          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: DC 410262 RO


               ORDERED, that this petition be granted, and that rent 
          reductions granted by the Administrator hereby are revoked as per 
          the Commissioner's order of December 23, 1992.  Any arrears due the 
          owner from the tenant(s) as a result of this order may be paid in 
          equal monthly installments over the course of the next twelve (12) 
          months.

          ISSUED:





                                                                        
                                          JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                          Acting Deputy Commissioner




                                                    







    

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws
Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name