St. John's Dorm Built in Jamaica Estates
Dorm Looms Over Neighborhood
by Jillian Abbott , Queens Chronicle Reporter
Attempts to halt or even slow St. John’s University from building a six-story dorm on Henley Road in residential Jamaica Estates appear to have failed.
St. John’s confirmed that construction continues at the site, located at 172-14 Henley Road, despite an independent engineer’s report that identified 33 deficiencies in the plans and construction of the building. The independent engineer, Joel Miele of Miele Associates, warned state Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose) that there was little chance that his findings would stop the construction, according to Assemblyman Mark Weprin (D-Fresh Meadows). Miele found that the plans had inadequate provisions for handicapped bathrooms, fire safety, ventilation and lighting.
The 485-bed dorm, which is rapidly approaching completion, has risen above the height of one-family homes to tower over the neighborhood, dominating the view for several blocks around.
Approved because of a loophole that designates dorms as community facilities and allows then to be built to almost twice the height of zoned businesses and residences, the dorm has met with community opposition at every turn.
Upon receipt of the report, Padavan wrote to the Department of Buildings asking them to address the deficiencies and stop the construction. But following a meeting between the developer, David Belt, of H2H Residences LLC, and representatives of the DOB, the plans were found to be in full compliance with codes. Of the 33 deficiencies, all but one required only minor modifications, according to the DOB.
The one substantial change to the plans was the provision for a smoke door in a corridor that runs longer than 125 feet. A smoke door is a door or set of doors placed in a corridor to restrict the spread of smoke and to retard the spread of fire by reducing draft. A spokesman for the DOB said that while this was a serious issue, it had been addressed and other issues, such as the size provision for handicapped bathrooms was exceeded in the plan because they were eight feet wide and the code requirement is for seven feet. He was unable to explain why Miele found the plans inadequate in this regard when the DOB found them to be compliant.
©Queens Chronicle 2008