From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nirco Investors v. New York City Loft Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 9, 1987
131 A.D.2d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

June 9, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Norman C. Ryp, J.).


In an order dated March 6, 1985, respondent New York City Loft Board determined that the premises at 101 West 25th Street (also known as 755 Sixth Avenue) was an interim multiple dwelling subject to the Loft Law (Multiple Dwelling Law § 280 et seq.). Petitioner subsequently commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging the administrative ruling on the ground that since some of the units contain less than the mandated minimum square footage, they are not in compliance with certain Zoning Resolutions, and, therefore, the building may not be designated an interim multiple dwelling. The Supreme Court granted the petition in part and remanded the matter to the Loft Board for further proceedings to ascertain whether the building could be brought into conformity with the applicable Zoning Resolutions. However, the Loft Board's policy of not considering the size of the units at the initial coverage determination of its proceedings has been upheld by this court in Little Arf'n Annie v New York City Loft Bd. ( 121 A.D.2d 852). The issue of whether or not the units in question meet the minimum size or bulk requirements of the Zoning Resolutions was, thus, appropriately deferred by respondent for future consideration.

Concur — Sandler, J.P., Sullivan, Ross and Milonas, JJ.


Summaries of

Nirco Investors v. New York City Loft Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 9, 1987
131 A.D.2d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Nirco Investors v. New York City Loft Board

Case Details

Full title:NIRCO INVESTORS CORP., Respondent-Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY LOFT BOARD…

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

Date published: Jun 9, 1987

Citations

131 A.D.2d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Wolinsky v. Kee Yip Realty Corp.

IV. The possibility of legalizing residential use in a manufacturing zone is not "mere speculation," and…

Katz v. New York City Loft Board

The subject building falls within the statutory definition. Nor does the fact that the units contain less…