ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA420124RO
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.: GA420124RO
DISTRICT RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: FA210108BO
FONTAINEBLEAU ESTATES, INC. (DJ421434BR)
PETITIONER
------------------------------------X
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner filed a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued concerning the housing
accommodations known as 217 East 26th Street, apt.8, 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, FA420108BO was
issued on December 6,1991. In that order, the Administrator
affirmed the finding of DJ421434BR, issued December 14, 1990, that
the owner be denied eligibility for a 1990/91 Maximum Base Rent
(MBR) increase, due to the owner's failure to meet the violation
certification requirements necessary to the owner's being granted
an MBR increase.
On appeal, the owner contends that all violations at the
subject premises have been cleared. As proof of this contention,
the owner submits on appeal a copy of an Affidavit from a licensed
architect. In the Affidavit, dated June 24, 1991 the affiant
testifies that he inspected the subject premises on June 6, 1991
and based on this inspection the affiant certifies that all
violations of record have been cleared.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this petition should
be denied.
ADM. REVIEW DOCKET NO.: GA420124RO
Section 2202.3(h) of the New York City Rent and Eviction
Regulations requires the owner, in order to gain eligibility to
raise MBRs at a given premises for a given cycle, to certify inter
alia the clearance of the requisite number of violations at the
subject premises by six months prior to the effective date of the
order of eligibility, at the latest. In the instant proceeding,
the owner was required to certify that the violations had been
cleared by June 30, 1989.
The Commissioner notes that on March 26, 1991 an inspection of
the subject premises was conducted by the New York City Department
of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). The HPD inspection
disclosed the existence of ten violations at the subject premises.
As noted above, a licensed architect visited the subject premises
on June 6, 1991 and found that all the violations had been cleared.
As noted above, to qualify for eligibility the requisite
number of violations had to be cleared by June 30, 1989. An
examination of the evidence presented by the owner on appeal and of
the HPD inspection leads the Commissioner to conclude that, giving
maximum credence to the owner's evidence, the record, as a whole
indicates that the violations were cleared between March 26, 1991
and June 6, 1991-nearly two years after the June 30, 1989 deadline
for such clearance.
The Commissioner notes that the owner certified to the
Administrator that the requisite number of violations were cleared
by June 25, 1989.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent and
Eviction Regulations, it is
ORDERED, that this petition for administrative review be, and
the same hereby is, denied, and that the order of the Rent
Administrator be, and the same hereby is, affirmed.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner
|
