In the circumstances, we find it to have been a reasonable exercise of discretion for the court to grant the application eight and one-half months beyond the ninety day period (see, Cruz v. New York City Hous. Auth., 178 A.D.2d 291). Plaintiff Caridad Lozada, an infant, had timely served the City of New York (which has since cross-claimed against the Housing Authority) and subsequent investigation revealed that the Housing Authority may be responsible for and/or had been repairing the subject sidewalk at the time of the injury. Likewise, a Housing Authority police officer did file a contemporaneous report (see, Matter of Gerzel v. City of New York, 117 A.D.2d 549), and apparently photographs of the accident site were taken and eyewitnesses have come forth. Defendant Housing Authority has not articulated any countervailing prejudice (see, Matter of Stenowich v. Colonie Indus. Dev. Agency, 151 A.D.2d 894, 896, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 615).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.