41-05-A

APPLICANT – New York City Board of Standards and Appeals.

OWNER: United Homes (contract vendee).

SUBJECT – Application February 24, 2005 – To consider dismissal for lack of prosecution.

PREMISES AFFECTED – 140 Beach 25th Street, to be known as 120 Beach 25th Street, Block15815, Lot 1, Borough of Queens.

COMMUNITY BOARD #14Q

APPEARANCES – None.

ACTION OF THE BOARD – Application dismissed.

THE VOTE TO DISMISS –

Affirmative: Chair Srinivasan, Vice Chair Collins, Commissioner Ottley-Brown and Commissioner Hinkson...... 4

Negative:...... 0

THE RESOLUTION:

WHEREAS, the decisions of the Queens Borough Commissioner, dated February 4, 2005, acting on Department of Buildings Application Nos. 401992992, 401993009, 401993385, 401992983, 401992723, 401992714, 401992705, 401993312, 401992670, 401992689, 401992698, 401993394 read in pertinent part:

“Proposed development in the bed of a mapped street (Beach 25th Street) is contrary to General City Law Section 35 Subdivision 2”; and

WHEREAS, this is an application to permit, within an R6 zoning district within a Waterfront Area, the construction of ten three-family homes and two six-family homes within the bed of a mapped street, contrary to Section 35 of the General City Law; and

WHEREAS, the application was filed on February 24, 2005; and

WHEREAS, on June 28, 2005, the applicant indicated an intent to file an application with the City Planning Commission (CPC) for Waterfront Certification; the Board agreed to allow the applicant time to obtain CPC approval; and

WHEREAS, on July 22, 2005, at the request of Board staff, the applicant revised the site plan to reflect the footprint of the buildings in relationship to the mapped street; and

WHEREAS, on November 28, 2005, the Department of Environmental Protection stated that it had reviewed the revised site plan and had no objections; and

WHEREAS, on August 2, 20006, the applicant notified the Board that the development had been revised so that the proposed homes were no longer within the bed of the mapped street; additionally, the applicant stated that the CPC certification had been obtained; and

WHEREAS, accordingly, the applicant stated that the waiver of Section 35 of the General City Law was not required for the homes; and

WHEREAS, however, the applicant requested that the application be kept open in order to address the need to install drywells within the bed of the mapped street, which would require a waiver of Section 35 of the General City Law; and

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2007, Board staff sent a letter to the applicant requesting information on the status of the application; and

WHEREAS, the Board did not receive any response from the applicant; and

WHEREAS, accordingly, the Board placed the matter on the calendar for a dismissal hearing; and.

WHEREAS, on May 30, 2007, the Board sent the applicant a Notice of Hearing stating that the case had been put on the July 10, 2007 dismissal calendar; and

WHEREAS, the applicant did not respond to this notice; and

WHEREAS, because of the applicant’s lack of prosecution of this application, it must be dismissed in its entirety.

Therefore it is Resolved that the application filed under BSA Cal. No. 41-05-A is hereby dismissed for lack of prosecution.

Adopted by the Board of Standards and Appeals, July 10, 2007.