STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
-------------------------------------X SJR No. 7011
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: EJ130002RO
HOMEWELL REALTY CORP.
C/O HORING AND WELIKSON
DOCKET NO.: CH130035OM
ORDER AND OPINION REMANDING PROCEEDING ON APPEAL
On October 1, 1990 the above named petitioner-owner timely filed an
administrative appeal against an order issued on August 31, 1990,
by the Rent Administrator (92-31 Union Hall Street, Jamaica, New
York) concerning the housing accommodations known as 144-30
Roosevelt Avenue, Flushing, New York, various apartments, wherein
the Rent Administrator denied major capital improvement (MCI) rent
increases for the stabilized apartments in the subject premises for
the installation of new windows based on a determination that the
owner had failed to comply with disclosure requirements set forth
in the offering plan regarding "capital improvements". The
Commissioner notes that the owner withdrew that part of its
application relating to the installation of a compactor at the
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 "deemed denial" of its administrative
appeal be annulled. The proceeding was then remitted, by
stipulation, to the Division for consideration of the petitioner's
In this petition, the owner contends, in substance, that the
Administrator's order was "super technical" since disclosure
requirements were satisfied through the DHCR application process.
The Commissioner is of the opinion that this proceeding should be
remanded for further consideration.
The record in this proceeding indicates that the window
installation was completed in March of 1987; that the owner's MCI
rent increase application was filed on August 8, 1988; and that the
offering plan was filed on April 18, 1989. Accordingly, the
owner's application was pending, and the tenants already had notice
thereof at the time the offering plan was filed.
ADMIN. REVIEW DOCKET NO. EJ130002RO
Furthermore, the record reveals that the disclosure requirement set
forth in the offering plan states "In the event any capital
improvements will take place, Sponsor will disclose in the Plan or
in any Amendment, the projected cost of such improvements..."
(emphasis added). The Commissioner is of the opinion that this
language contemplates future major capital improvements as opposed
to the window installation which was already completed when the
offering plan was filed.
Based upon the foregoing, the Commissioner is of the opinion that
the owner's MCI rent increase application was denied in error, and
that this proceeding should be remanded to the Administrator for
consideration of said application on its merits.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the provisions of the Rent
Stabilization Law and Code, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, remanded
for further consideration in accordance with this order and
opinion. The Rent Administrator's order is hereby revoked.
Joseph A. D'Agosta