FA 430361-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 S.J.R. NO. 5759
APPEAL OF
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
HELMSLEY - SPEAR, INC., DOCKET NO.: FA 430361-RO
DISTRICT RENT ORDER
DOCKET NO.: DD 420007-BT
(BJ 420958-BR)
PETITIONER
----------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named petitioner-owner timely filed a Petition for
Administrative Review against an order issued on April 6, 1990 by
the Director of the Maximum Base Rent (MBR) Unit, 92-31 Union Hall
Street, Jamaica, NY concerning housing accommodations known as 7
Park Avenue, New York, NY, various accommodations. However on
March 21, 1991, the Commissioner issued an order dismissing the
petition on the basis that it was not timely filed.
Subsequent thereto, the petitioner-owner filed a petition in the
Supreme Court pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and
Rules requesting that the order of the Commissioner be annulled.
The proceeding was remitted by Court order to the Division for
consideration of the petitioner's administrative appeal on the
merits.
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.
On February 7, 1989, the Director issued an Order of Eligibility
granting 1988-89 MBR increases for the subject building. [Docket
No. BJ-420958-BR.]
Subsequent thereto, one of the tenants filed a challenge (first
level administrative appeal) to the 1988-89 Order of Eligibility
alleging, in substance, that certain violations had not been
corrected.
On April 6, 1990, the Director issued an Order denying 1988-89
Maximum Base Rents based on a finding that the owner failed to
meet the violation certification requirements and revoking the
above mentioned Order of Eligibility. [Docket No. DD-420007-BT.]
In this petition, the owner contends, in substance, that it has no
record of any violations for the subject apartments.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should be
denied.
FA 430361-RO
Procedures established under the Rent and Eviction Regulations
provide, among other things, that no rent increase may be
authorized under the Maximum Base Rent program commencing January
1, 1988 unless the owner has removed all of the rent impairing
violations (as defined in the multiple dwelling law, Section 302a)
and at least 80% of all other (i.e., non-rent impairing)
violations on record as of January 1, 1987, or six months prior to
the filing of the 1988-89 Violation Certification, whichever is
later. In this proceeding the owner filed the Violation
Certification on October 29, 1987, thereby certifying that all
violations on record as of January 1, 1987 had been cleared,
corrected or abated.
The record shows that on January 1, 1987 there were zero (0) rent
impairing violations and sixteen (16) non-rent impairing
violations (Item Nos. 446, 448, 450, 465, 470, 471, 472, 481,
483, 486, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503, and 504). Therefore, in order
to qualify for 1988-89 MBR increases, the owner was required to
correct thirteen (13) of the 16 non-rent impairing violations
pending against the building on January 1, 1987.
On August 16 and 23, 1989 inspectors from the Office of Code
Enforcement conducted physical inspections of the subject premises
and reported that nine (9) of the non-rent impairing violations
(Item Nos. 446, 450, 470, 486, 499, 500, 502, 503 and 504) had
been cleared or cancelled, and that seven (7) of the non-rent
impairing violations (Item Nos. 448, 465, 471, 472, 481, 483 and
501) had not been corrected or no access could be obtained in the
case of five (5) of the 7 (Item Nos. 448, 465, 471, 472 and 483).
From the record, it cannot be found that the requisite number of
violations pending as of January 1, 1987 (in this case, 13 of the
16 non-rent impairing violations) were cleared, corrected or
abated. Based thereon, the Commissioner finds that the owner is
not entitled to 1988-89 Maximum Base Rent increases.
Regarding the owner's contention that it has no record of any
violations for the subject apartments, the Commissioner notes that
the report of the Office of Code Enforcement inspectors is of
greater probative value than the bare allegations of the owner as
to the existence of violations.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent and Eviction Regulations,
it is
FA 430361-RO
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied,
and that the Director's Order be, and the same hereby is,
affirmed.
ISSUED:
ELLIOT SANDER
Deputy Commissioner
|
