Opinion
November 15, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bonadio, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Doerr, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.
Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: On the record before us, we cannot conclude that the trial court erred as a matter of law by utilizing the replacement cost method for valuing the subject building (Matter of Rochester Urban Renewal Agency [Patchen Post], 45 N.Y.2d 1, 9; Matter of Great Atl. Pac. Tea Co. v. Kiernan, 42 N.Y.2d 236, 240; Matter of City of Rochester [Ryan McIntee], 56 A.D.2d 715, 716, lv denied 41 N.Y.2d 806; cf., Matter of City of Rochester v S.C. Toth, Inc., 59 A.D.2d 1020, affd 45 N.Y.2d 984). Because this is the only issue raised by the parties on this appeal on a stipulated statement in lieu of a record on appeal, we affirm the judgment.