Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: VARIOUS TENANTS OF the GARAGE LOCATED AT 68-38 YELLOWSTONE BLVD., Queens, New York, appellants, v. Paul A. ROLDAN, as Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, respondent; Y. Zevzal Realty Associates, intervenor-respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal dated March 19, 1997, which upheld an order of the Rent Administrator permitting the owner of the premises located at 63-38 Yellowstone Boulevard in Queens, to substitute a self-parking system in its garage for the existing manned parking system, the petitioner appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Berke, J.), dated February 17, 1998, as denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.
The owner proposed to replace the presence of parking attendants in the garage with various security devices, including a door which would be operated by the tenants with remote control devices, additional lighting, security for windows, and 24-hour surveillance cameras. In addition, the owner proposed to waive garage rent for one year and to reduce garage rentals by 20% thereafter. The respondent's determination that these proposals constituted an “adequate substitute” for the presence of the parking attendants was reasonably based upon the evidence in the record and, thus, was not arbitrary and capricious (CPLR 7803[3]; see, Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321; see also, Matter of Oriental Boulevard, Co. v. N.Y. City Conciliation and Appeals Board, 92 A.D.2d 470, 459 N.Y.S.2d 50, affd. 60 N.Y.2d 633, 467 N.Y.S.2d 355, 454 N.E.2d 938).
The petitioners' remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM OF THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 12, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)