Matter of Chiang v. Loft Bd. of City of N.Y

Full title: In the Matter of CHI JUNG CHIANG, Petitioner, v. LOFT BOARD OF THE CITY OF…

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 30, 1993

198 A.D.2d 181 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

604 N.Y.S.2d 78

Opinion

November 30, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Peter Tom, J.].

Respondent's determination that the premises was in part the subject of residential occupancy during the statutory "window period" (Multiple Dwelling Law § 281) is supported by substantial evidence.

Since respondent is the body responsible for administering the Loft Law, its construction of that statute, if not irrational or unreasonable, should be upheld. Here, respondent's interpretation that the Loft Law (Multiple Dwelling Law § 281 [i]) does not require that each unit residentially occupied during the window period be converted from manufacturing, commercial or warehouse use is neither irrational nor unreasonable (Matter of Swing v New York City Loft Bd., 180 A.D.2d 529, 530).

We have considered the remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ross and Rubin, JJ.