ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EC430229RO

                                  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.: EC430229RO

                    DENNIS NEIVENS C/O            DISTRICT RENT
                    FINKELSTEIN BORAH, ET AL.     ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
                                                  NO.: DA420059BT
                                                       (CA420462BR)
                                   PETITIONER
          ------------------------------------X

                       ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING

               The above-named owner filed a timely petition for 
          administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing 
          accommodations known as 24-26 East 93rd Street, Apts., 2D, 8D, 9D, 
          10D, New York, N.Y.

               The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record 
          and has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to 
          the issues raised by the petition.

               The issue before the Commissioner is whether the 
          Administrator's order was correct.

               The Administrator's order being appealed,DA420059BT was issued 
          on January 26, 1990.  In that order, the Administrator modified the 
          finding of CA420462BR, issued December 23, 1988, that the owner be 
          granted eligibility for a 1988/89 Maximum Base Rent (MBR) increase, 
          due to the owner's meeting the violation certification requirements 
          necessary to the owner's being granted an MBR increase.  Under the 
          original terms of CA420462BR the owner was granted eligibility to 
          raise MBRs at both 24 and at 26 East 93rd Street, which are 
          adjoining buildings.  A tenant residing at 26 East 93rd Street 
          filed the Challenge leading to the issuance of order under review 
          herein, in which Challenge he contested the Administrator's grant 
          of eligibility, inasmuch as it applied to 26 East 93rd Street.  The 
          tenant argued at Challenge that both premises were completely 
          separate and had different Multiple Dwelling Registration (MDR) 
          numbers.  As noted above, the Administrator agreed with the tenant 
          and, in the order being appealed herein modified the grant of 
          eligibility, restricting the owner's eligibility to raise MBRs to 
          24 East 93rd Street only.    














          ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: EC430229RO

               On appeal the owner argues that the two premises are on one 
          tax lot and have common utilities and a common basement.  As such, 
          they should be considered as one multiple unit dwelling.

               The Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should 
          be remanded.

               An examination of the record confirms the tenant's allegations 
          made at Challenge that the two premises each have separate MDR 
          numbers.  This fact was conceded by the owner on appeal.  The
          examination additionally disclosed that at each premise different 
          inspections by the New York City Department of Housing Preservation 
          and Development (HPD) disclosed different violations, which were 
          compiled in two different Lists of Pending Violations (LPVs).

               This examination additionally discloses, however, evidence 
          confirming the owner's contentions made at appeal.

               The Commissioner is therefore of the opinion that the 
          information presented by both parties below is insufficient to 
          allow the Commissioner to determine whether the subject premises 
          compose two separate buildings (as maintained by the tenant below) 
          or one contiguous "range address" (as maintained by the owner) for 
          the purpose of MBR eligibility.

               THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and 
          Eviction Regulations, it is 

               ORDERED, that this proceeding be, and the same hereby is, 
          remanded to the Administrator.

               On remand the Administrator is directed to determine whether 
          the subject premises compose two separate buildings or one dwelling 
          unit for the purpose of MBR eligibility.  The Administrator is 
          directed to gather additional information from the parties to this 
          proceeding in pursuit of such a determination, such information 
          gathering to include hearings, if necessary.

          ISSUED:     
               



                                                                          
                                             JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
                                             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