Opinion
April 30, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Dontzin, J.).
A rent reduction was imposed on apartments in petitioner's residential building for service reductions, including an inoperative elevator, unclean public areas, soft spots on the roof of the building, lack of heat and hot water, an inoperative intercom system, and loose tiles on the first four floors of the building. The factual issues raised by petitioner were for the administrative agency to determine, and the record shows that the determinations challenged herein have a rational basis, and were not arbitrary or capricious (see, e.g., Matter of 230 E. 52nd St. Assocs. v. State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 131 A.D.2d 349). The Agency was not required to give the petitioner notice of an inspection (Matter of Albert v. Eimicke, 151 A.D.2d 746).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.