Quantcast

City to decide size of new complex in Richmond Hill

By Alex Davidson

Mary Ann Carey, district manager of the board, said in a phone interview Monday that members approved the project at 85-11 and 85-17 120th St. with stipulations that the developer increase the number of new parking spots at the site, include more than one elevator for the building and stay true to the design plan's landscaping outline.

“The issue is the community board did put restrictions on (the development),” Carey said. “After they (the board) rules, we will see how it is going to go.”

The six-story condominium building will consist of 46 units if the city Board of Standards and Appeals approves a zoning variance allowing for a more dense development. Under existing zoning rules, the developer would only be allowed to construct a 34-unit building, according to the resolution.

Some 29 two-bedroom condos are to be included in the development, while the remaining 17 units will have one bedroom.

No date has yet been specified as to when the Board of Standards and Appeals will hold its hearing to decide the fate of the development. The identity of the developer on the project was not discussed at the meeting.

Carey said the board at its Feb. 10 meeting called for a resolution to be written outlining the body's concerns for the development. At the top of that list was the parking issue.

“Although we acknowledge that the applicant is already proposing parking in excess of what is required by the revised zoning resolution requirements, parking in the area is extremely scarce,” the resolution said. “In order not to exacerbate an already difficult situation, the applicant should attempt to increase the number of parking spaces to one space per unit (either in the cellar or the open parking in the rear yard) in order to alleviate the area-wide parking problem.”

The board also was concerned with the original plan's call for only one elevator. In the resolution, board members said they wanted a second one included to allow for contingency operations should the first one fail to operate.

“Yet if this six-story building is dependent on only one elevator, any malfunction of this elevator will not only cause discomfort for the able but have the effect of locking in the disabled and the elderly,” the resolution reads.

As for the landscaping, Community Board 9 said it wants the developer to stay true to the design plan's preliminary drawings.

“We would ask the Board of Standards and Appeals to hold the applicant to a written, enforceable agreement to provide the street and interior plantings that are shown in the renderings provided to the community board and to maintain them or their equivalent for the life of the building.”

Reach reporter Alex Davidson by e-mail at news@timesledger.com or by calling 718-229-0300, Ext. 156.

More from Around New York