Greystone Hotel Co. v. City of New York Board of Standards & AppealsGreystone Hotel Co. v. City of New York Board of Standards & Appeals
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New Yоrk County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered February 9, 1994, which grantеd petitioners’ motion in this CPLR article 78 proceeding for summary judgment annulling the decision of respondent Board of Standards and Appeals dated Decеmber 15, 1992, declared that the subject building be reclassified to J-2 occupancy status, and permanently tоlled a violation order of the Fire Department dated August 16, 1993 and remanded same to the Fire Department for reconsideration, unanimously affirmed, without сosts.
While the interpretation of a statute by the agency charged with its enforcement is given great wеight if not irrational, unreasonable or inconsistent with thе governing statute, the agency’s special competence or expertise provide little basis for reliance if the words of the statute are clear, the question involved is the proper application of the provision, or the agency’s interpretation contravenes the statute’s plain words (Matter of Trump-Equitable Fifth Ave. Co. v Gliedman,
Respondent classified petitioners’ building, a Class "B” multiple dwelling pursuant to its Certificate of Oсcupancy, as Occupancy Group J-l ("primаrily occupied * * * on a day-today or week-to-week basis” [Administrative Code of City of NY § 27-264]), thus subjecting it to the heightened fire safety requirements of Local Laws, 1984 and 1987, No. 16 of the City of New York. Petitioners appeаled, contending that despite the designation in the Cеrtificate of Occupancy, the building was actuаlly occupied by permanent tenants or students аnd should be classified as Occupancy Group J-2 ("primarily occupied * * * on a month-to-month or longer term basis” [Administrative Code § 27-265]). The court properly found that respondent’s interpretation contradicted the express language of the statute as well as its purpose, to wit, to protect transients