Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012_11_28 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK NOVEMBER 28, 2012 HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM C, OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK AGENDA APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO.2919 WALGREENS Application of Walgreens requesting a variance to install three internally illuminated signs on the premises located at 1333 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411, Lot 119. APPLICATION NO. 2 CASE NO.2920 PEPE PORSCHE Application of Pepe Porsche requesting a variance to install 4 internally illuminated signs on the premise located at 2500 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411, Lot 119. APPLICATION NO. 3 CASE NO.2921 MICHAEL CHARITOU Application of Michael Charitou requesting a variance to construct a common driveway on the premise located at 529 Weaver Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 106, Lot 163. Roll Call. Present:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King Also Present: Kevin G. Ryan, Counsel, Ernest Odineria,Town Board Liaison, Kevin Moore Assistant Building Inspector. Absent/Excused: Seth Marcus, Ronald Carpaneto, Building Inspector. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:50P.M. The Chairman stated that there are only 4 members present tonight and the applicant's would need at least 3 votes in favor to be approved, anyone who would like to adjourn the matter may request to do so. 1 APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO.2919 WALGREENS Motion:To open the public hearing Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Janet J. Giris, of DelBello, Donnellan,Weingarten,Wise&Wiederker, LLP; One North Lexington Avenue, White Plains, New York the applicant's attorney addressed the Board. Ms. Giris gave a brief explanation of the application. The applicants have been working on the project with the Town for 2 years, have been before the Board of Architectural Review for months; and are now before the ZBA for 2 variances 1-for internal illumination and 2-for a third sign. Mr. Moeser the applicant's architect stated that the original plan evolved over many months with the BAR and showed a plan dated 9/27/2012. Mr. Ryan referred to the letter from Mr.Jacobson dated November 26, 2012 stating the rear sign would be non-illuminated and placed on the vertical drop of the awning. The application before the Board is not the same as seen by the BAR. A discussion as to whether the BAR voted on the application before them was held. Mr. Ryan stated that the BAR's advisory opinion has to come first. Ms. Giris stated there will be less signage on the building then has been there previously. Mr. Wexler stated that he doesn't see a need for the Hommocks Road south elevation sign, and he is against internal illumination facing the apartments across the street, but he understands the need for signage over the entrance. Mr. Moeser stated that the BAR was against any external illumination and pylon signs. The three signs and internal illumination were discussed. Mr. Ryan suggested a temporary adjournment to refer to the code as to the proper sequence. Motion: To temporarily adjourn Action:Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. 2 Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Application No.2 Case No. 2920 Pepe Porsche Motion: To open the public hearing Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Jeffery King. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Don Mazin the applicant's attorney and Joseph Crocco the applicant's architect addressed the Board. Mr. Mazin stated that the applicant has been before the BAR which approved the site plan and signage application. Mr. Crocco stated the main PORSCHE sign would be internally lit,the 2nd sign Pepe is halo back lit pin mounted,the 3rd and 4th are pylon insignia sign on the Boston Post Road entrance and a service area signs located at the front of the building by the service area door both internally lit. Mr. Baron asked about the directional signage, and why they were not included in the sign count, Mr. Crocco responded they are informational only. A discussion ensued as to whether or not they are required to be before the ZBA. Mr. Ryan and Mr. Moore checked the Town Code. Mr. Ryan suggested that the applicant continue with the application for the four signs and if required for the directional signage they must return. There were no further questions or comments from the Board There were no questions or comments from the Public. Motion: To close the public hearing Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Arthur Wexler, Chairman. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Motion:To approve the requested variance 3 Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, seconded by Jeffery King. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. After review, on motion of Mr. Baron, seconded by Mr. King the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0). Ayes: Wexler, Baron, O'Neill, King Nays: None Absent/Excused: Marcus WHEREAS, Pepe Porsche, requested a variance to install four internally illuminated signs on the premises located at 2500 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 503, Lot123. WHEREAS,the Building Director declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Sections 240-45H(8)(a)(c)[2] and Section 240-45H(8)(a)(c)[4], WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set forth in such application,the proposed four signs are in excess of the two signs that are allowed, and four signs as proposed are internally illuminated where internal illumination is not permitted. WHEREAS,the Board examined the Plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon. WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; and WHEREAS,the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as required by New York State Town Law§267-b 1. The Board finds the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. 4 A. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds there will be none, this is a commercial area, a large lot and the signage one of which is a pylon sign on the Boston Post Road two of which are essentially two halves of one informational signs on the side of the building and one is a small monument sign at the front of the building do not are really keeping in character with the neighborhood and are both adjacent and structures previously to this property. B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds no the various signs are necessary to advertise both the business and in the case of the monument sign the fact that there is a service department on premises as well as a sales floor. C. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds no once again the sign on the side of the building can in many regards be considered as one sign but for our purposes we are treating it as two. the monument sign is relatively small related to the street, the pylon sign is necessary to advertise the business In a very congested traffic area where the building is set back from the road. D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighbor. The Board finds that no while the signs are illuminated they are not over large as to project tremendous amounts of beyond the property or in any way overwhelm any other similar lighting or signs in this district. E. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that yes but it is not determinative in this case. 2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general purposes and internet of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 3. For reasons stated above,the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. 5 NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant November 28, 2012. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the Resolution. 4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO 2919 WALGREENS reconvened Mr. Ryan stated the code speaks as BAR giving advisory opinion to ZBA. If the Board wants to fashion a resolution conditioned on the approval of the BAR, it must be carefully worded. Mr. Girls stated if this Board is comfortable with granting 3 signs, 2 of which will be internally illuminated and the south elevation facing the Hommocks apartments not internally illuminated as long as the BAR concurs the applicant would be agreeable. The Board discussed the proposal. There were no questions or comments from the public. Motion:To close the public hearing Action:Approved 6 Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Motion: To approve the requested variance Action:Approve Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, seconded by Frederick Baron. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Baron the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0). Ayes: Wexler, Baron, O'Neill, King Nays: None Absent/Excused: Marcus WHEREAS,Walgreens, requested a variance to install 3 internally illuminated signs located at 1333 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411, Lot 119. WHEREAS,the Building Director declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Sections 240-45(8)(a)(c)[2] and 240-45(8)(a)(c)[4]; WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set forth in such application,the proposed three signs are in excess of the two signs that are allowed and the three signs as proposed are internally illuminated where internal illumination is not permitted. WHEREAS,the Board examined the Plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon. 7 WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; and WHEREAS,the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as required by New York State Town Law§267-b 1. The Board finds the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. A. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that this is in a location primarily a commercial area,that it is not out of character with the properties across the street Boston Post Road and to the right of the building of the Boston Post Road. B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that given the type of location of this building being a long elevation along the south elevation or the Hommocks Road elevation and the difficulty of presenting the signs because on the corner of the Post Road and Hommocks Road the position of the existing mature trees there that the increase of three signs is appropriate on this site because also given that the parking is in the rear and the entry to the store is in the rear different then most of the other stores on the Post Road where the entry is in the front of the store on the Post Road. The conditions of the site dictate the need for three signs. C. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that these are signs and not an addition to the bulk area requirement for a building and therefore not substantial. D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighbor. The board finds that the addition of the signs will not have an adverse impact to the neighborhood. The existing building that was there before had more than the three signs requested by the applicant. E. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created but not determinative. 8 2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general purposes and internet of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 3. For reasons stated above,the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant November 28, 2012. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the Resolution. 4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. CONDITIONS Recomendation 1. Only 2 internally illuminated signs, no internally illuminated sign on the south elevation Hommocks Road side. As shown on the 9/27/2012 drawing) 2. That under section 4 the environmental impacts internal illumination on the Hommocks Road sign would have adverse impact on the residential apartments across the street. 3. ? KR Substantial? Not violating the limits of the code except internal illumination. Given that the building is located on a corner lot,and three (3)facades are visible to the public from public rights-of-way the request to increase the number of signs to three is not substantial. FB the request to have a sign on each side is not substantial. KR the fact that there are multiple tenants in the building. 9 This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 3 CASE NO.2921 MICHAEL CHARITOU Motion: To open the public hearing Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Mike Charitou the applicant addressed the Board stating he is before the Planning Board for a 2 lot subdivision and it was suggested that he request a variance for a shared driveway. Rather then have 2 driveways on such a busy street. Mr. Wexler asked the applicant for a zoning chart stating he does not have enough information to make an informed opinion. Mr. Wexler further requested all the same drawings as were given to the Planning Board. Mr. Wexler requested the same drawing as given to the planning board. The Board discussed the application. Mr. Ryan asked if the Planning Board has been given all the site plan dimensions and a definite building plan. Mr. Charitou stated the plan is still evolving. Mr. Ryan stated the Zoning board can't look at a plan the Planning Board has not approved. Mr. Wexler stated that the application was poorly presented, he wants a full application with topography, a plans. Mr. Ryan stated that it would be needed to answer the 5 criteria questions. Motion:To adjourn the matter to the next meeting. Action:Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, seconded by Jeffery King. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). 10 Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. MINUTES July 25,2012 Motion:To approve the minutes of July 25, 2012 with technical correction Action:Approved Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. The Minutes of September 25, 2012 were tabled. Motion: To adjourn the meeting at 10:05 P.M. Action:Adjourned Moved by Frederick Baron, Seconded by Irene O'Neill. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Frederick Baron, Irene O'Neill,Jeffery King. Minutes prepared by Francine M. Brill Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 11 12