Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000_09_21 Board of Architectural Review Minutes • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK SEPTEMBER 21, 2000, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Edward Z. Jacobson, Chairman 1101. Sue Ellen Commender E. Robert Wassman 451 4 RECEIVED Absent: Anthony Spagnola luV 17 Ifil Pamela T. Washington Robert M. Immerman Also Present: Ronald A. Carpaneto, Director of Building 11 �XlTI#3 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jacobson at 8:10 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Jacobson asked if there were any additions or corrections to the Minutes of the August 17, 2000 BAR meeting. After some discussion and corrections made, upon a motion made by Mr. Wassman, seconded- • by Ms. Commender, the Amended Minutes of the August 17, 2000 meeting were unanimously approved. Chairman Jacobson read the application as follows: BLOCKBUSTER/James Gaita- 1331 Boston Post Road-Block 411,Lot 119-pole light(adjourned 8/10/00) James Gaita, from Envirospace, the designers and consultants for the parking lot for Blockbuster Video, appeared, along with Mr. Novack, the owner of the property. Mr. Gaita said they were before the Planning Board last week and received Board approval on the overall project. They were asked to return and bring the specifics on the light pole. The Board has the new drawings dated, 8/25/00, with indicated revisions. They also pointed out at the top of the drawing the existing 150 watt wall-mounted existing light fixtures that are in three locations; circled (1), (2) and (3). He said there is also a 150 watt light fixture at the corner of the concrete block wall. Mr. Gaita showed the Board pictures of the light fixture that is at Lexus on the Boston Post Road, which is a simple, unobtrusive light fixture he said. You don't see the light source, unlike the other that was first put up. The photometrics on the second page will explain where the light is thrown. Mr. Gaita demonstrated with an overlay. Mr. Jacobson asked if Mr. Gaita is satisfied with the lighting levels that result. Mr. Gaita said he thinks it is a better approach than having both two poles there, it's directional, goes forward and works well. • Mr. Wassman asked if that is based on the 20 ft. pole height. Mr. Gaita said yes, it is on the 20 ft. pole. Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 2 • • Mr. Wassman asked Mr. Gaits what is considered an optimum parking lot light level for purposes of security and safety. Mr. Novack said towns vary, but they like to go by is about 5 footcandles. Mr. Wassman asked if the new luminaire wattage can be increased, too. Mr. Gaita said no. Mr. Gaita said it is a 400 watt metal halide, a clean white light. Mr. Jacobson asked Mr. Carpaneto if the Town has set a minimum light level. Mr. Carpaneto said there is a maximum of 25 footcandles at 25 ft. Mr. Jacobson said he is sure that the Town Code has a minimum light level. Mr. Gaita said they believe they will have a nice amount of light, without really making it bright. Mr. Jacobson said he is for achieving a safe result, without over lighting the parking lot. Mr. Carpaneto said he knows there is a standard for ATM's, but that's a Federal issue. Mr. Jacobson said if it meets the Town's minimum requirement for lighting the lot, he has no objection to what is being proposed. • Mr. Jacobson asked if there were any additional comments. Ms. Commender asked if the two fixtures will be compatible and look similar. Mr. Novack said they are the same bronze color. Mr. Wassman said when he received this notice it said remove 54 ft. of the existing aluminum fence. He said at one time a black coated chain link wire fence was discussed. He asked how long a fence line it is. Mr. Gaita said it is about 150 ft. Mr. Wassman asked if the 54 ft. that is being removed is not reusable. Mr. Gaita said there are actually six sections being removed. Mr. Wassman said it would be nice to have the same kind of vertical aluminum fence on that corner on both sides rather than a chain link fence which he thinks is ugly. Mr. Jacobson said Mr. Wassman is suggesting Mr. Gaita reuse what is being removed and add to it. Mr. Novack said the economics are astronomically not in his favor. He had that discussion with the contractor. He said it never occurred to him to use the existing fence, as it is the Town fence. Secondly, to install another 100 ft. of that fence is three or four times more expensive than what they plan to use. • Mr. Jacobson said on the lighting submission, what is in front of the Board doesn't accurately represent what Mr. Gaita is going to do. The pole and fixture on the drawing are 22 ft. high as shown. He asked if they are going to make it 20 ft. high, including the base. Mr. Gaita said it is 22 ft. from the ground. Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 3 • Mr. Jacobson said he was remiss in not informing the applicants that because there is only a quorum of the Board this evening, approval has to be unanimous. Mr. Jacobson asked if there is a motion to approve the lighting proposal as submitted and amended. Ms. Commender asked if something could be done other than traffic cones, shown on the plan. Mr. Gaita said he received several options and reviewed putting up the curbing. The problem is with snow removal and trucks coming in, they would not be removable and would break. The idea is to prevent anybody from illegally parking there and sticking out where they shouldn't be at the turn. It is just a safety issue, so people can see. They are small cones, a 2 in. wide vertical pipe,that goes into the ground. They are very clean and good-looking. Mr. Wassman made reference to the shopping center across the street that has curbing and said that the Board has approved plans with curbs and snow has been piled against the curbs for five years. There is not a curb that is moved out of the way. Every island is a curbed island and they have trees in the middle of it. Mr. Gaita said they do not have islands anywhere. They would have to create an island there. It wouldn't just be a curb, but would become a pool creating an ice skating rink when it froze. They would have to create an area, and that is not their intention at all. They don't feel it works with this property. Ms. Commender said cars back into the traffic cones and they get knocked over. Mr. Gaita said the owner would have to maintain it. • Mr. Gaita said they looked at the curbing. He said the Planning Board did approve the site plan. Mr. Novack said they virtually had this discussion at the last meeting. Ms. Commender and Mr. Wassman said they don't like it. Mr. Wassman said he knows Mr. Gaita ignored the fact that he had to have some kind of a marker there. He thinks the substitution,as adopted by the resolution of the Planning Board,he doesn't particularly favor. They are wrecked within six months time. Mr. Gaita said he actually didn't have anything there. They were only putting white striping. He said the Planning Board commented that they didn't want people parking there. He said they prefer not to have anything,just clean white striping. Mr. Wassman said that wouldn't work. There will be cars all over the ends. Mr. Gaita said that is why they are going this route. He said if it proves to not be the right thing, the owner will look at it and offer another option. Mr. Wassman said there may be one of the Board that won't approve it as submitted, and he has a right to come back. Mr. Gaita said he thought the site plan was approved at the last meeting, and it was adjourned for the light pole only. • Mr. Jacobson said his understanding was correct, but obviously this wasn't an issue at that time. Mr. Jacobson suggested separating the lighting issue from this and suggested they propose something else. Mr. Gaita said he would like to discuss what the Board would like. Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 4 • Mr. Wassman said the Board would like a curbed island. Mr. Gaita asked with planting in it? Mr. Wassman said yes, and suggested greenery to be used. Mr. Novack said they had discussed there would not be planting in the middle. Mr. Jacobson told Mr. Novack he is missing the point. The Board does not like Mr. Novack's solutions for keeping the cars out of that area. Mr. Gaita asked if they were to put a blacktop formed curb around the perimeter, fill it with soil and plant grass if that would be a better solution. Mr. Wassman said he would agree to this extent,that when people come in to put blacktop,then they come back and put a molded blacktop curb they can't be assured it will stay. He said he likes a structured curb, a granite block curb creating an island, with mulch, block or plantings in it. Make it identical in substances. After further discussion, Mr. Wassman said it is an important turning point. You don't want cars running into other cars either. You want it identified and kept orderly. Mr. Gaits said the Belgium block is being used elsewhere, and asked if that is what the Board wants to come around the curb, with which the Board agreed. • Mr. Novack said what is decided here, if the Board is agreeing that is something they like, that will be fine. Ms. Commender asked if they could put junipers or cobble stones on the island? Mr. Novack said they will install the juniper. Ms. Commender asked if the corner, outside on the street side, is going to be plain curb. Mr. Gaita said it is very low and they're not doing anything there. It is a steep drop-off. They will be putting block there. It is an embankment and it goes to an existing catch basin. They can't block it, because that is the way the water flows. Mr. Novack said it faces on both sides, inside and out. That is one of the few things that came up at the Coastal Zone Management Commission meeting. Nothing can be done outside there, because that has to be left so water can flow into it. Mr. Jacobson asked for a motion regarding the lighting. Then the Board will summarize their comments on the island curb. On a motion made by Mr. Wassman, seconded by Ms. Commender, the following resolution was unanimously ADOPTED: WHEREAS, James Gaita/Envirospace, Inc. for Blockbuster Video have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to install two single pole light fixtures in the center portion • of the lot to provide general illumination. The pole to be 20 ft. high with a single 400 watt fixture shielded; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the review by the Board of Architectural Review is required; and Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 5 • WHEREAS, James Gaita/Envirospace, Inc. for Blockbuster Video submitted an application for approval to the Board; and WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. The application for lighting will be in accordance with the submission of the Magnuform #2 series, luminaire, on a 24 in. base, is acceptable, except for the color, at the height as shown. a. The color of the material will be the same as the other fixture,a bronze color. b. Both the pole and the fixture will match the others, anodized bronze. 2. The traffic zones as shown will be removed and replaced with Belgium block curbing at the center end of the parking isle. 3. Install a new junction box for future curb lighting consideration by the owner if deemed • necessary. 4. The planting area created will be filled with soil and a reasonable number of small juniper bushes. 5. The opposite side traffic cones will be removed and the areas striped per parking plans. Chairman Jacobson read the next application as follows: MAMARONECK GARDENS/Yannuzzi - Palmer Avenue - Block 408, Lot 290 -sign Louise Yannuzzi, the President of Mamaroneck Gardens Board of Directors, appeared to address the Board,along with Diane Raffa, Board member who has been submitting the pictures and plans to the Board for approval. Ms. Yannuzzi pointed out the fence, etc. that has been removed. Ms. Commender asked if it was their intent to put the sign at an angle. Ms. Yannuzzi said yes. Ms. Raffa said there was one previously there. Mr. Wassman asked if 47 in. is within the allowable height. Mr. Carpaneto said that the sign requires an area variance. The square footage in a residential zone is only • 3 ft. Mr. Jacobson said the sign as proposed is 7 ft. long, and a little over 6 ft. high. Mr. Carpaneto said monument signs are allowed to be 6 ft. high. Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 6 • Mr. Jacobson said he has a problem with the size of this sign. He thinks it is overwhelming, when people walk past the sign on the sidewalk. Mr. Wassman asked why the need for such a large sign. After some discussion regarding the sign, Ms. Raffa asked the allowable size of a sign. Mr. Carpaneto said the allowable size of a sign is 3 sq. ft., which is 1 ft. by 3 ft. Mr. Carpaneto asked if they have seen the sign for Larchmont Acres West. Ms. Raffa said yes. Mr. Carpaneto said that sign went to the Zoning Board and was granted. This Board also saw that sign. It's probably half the size of this sign. This is a little bit higher and it faces north and south. Ms. Yannuzzi asked how high the Board wants it to be. Mr. Jacobson said the Board does not want it high at all. Ms. Raffa asked what the code says. Mr. Carpaneto said Larchmont Acres West has a 6 ft. high sign. Ms. Yannuzzi said it is a very nice sign and asked if they could have something like that. 110 Mr. Jacobson asked about the sign colors. Ms. Yannuzzi said it wouldn't look that color. It is more of a burgundy; darker, deeper. New doors are being put in now and you can see the burgundy on those. Ms. Yannuzzi said the Board is suggesting the sign has to be smaller, with which the Board agreed. She asked if she has to do photos again. Mr. Jacobson said she does not have to do photos again. Mr. Carpaneto asked if they currently have a sign person. Ms. Yannuzzi said yes, they do. Ms. Yannuzzi said they have a Board meeting Monday evening. They can take everybody to see the Larchmont Acres sign and go from there. Mr. Carpaneto said that is probably a good suggestion. Mr. Jacobson said the application is held over without penalty, for resubmission at the next meeting of the Board. Mr. Yannuzzi asked what date that will be. Mr. Jacobson said it is the third Thursday of every month. • Mr. Carpaneto suggested they look at the signage on Maxwell Avenue and Myrtle Boulevard toward the Thruway entrance, and look at the directory sign on the corner. On a motion made and seconded, it was unanimously • Board of Architectural Review September 21, 2000 Page 7 • • RESOLVED, that this matter be, and hereby is, adjourned to the October 25, 2000 meeting. OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Commender wanted to thank Mr. Carpaneto for pursuing Librett to take down all of those signs; speed limit, parking. Mr. Carpaneto said they were sent violations. Ms. Commender mentioned that Castro has the new sign up that the Board approved, but they didn't landscape around it and they didn't take down the other sign from the roof. Mr. Carpaneto said he will look into that. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the BAR will be held on October 19, 2000. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Jacobson asked if there was any other new business. There being none, on a motion made by Ms. Commender, seconded by Mr. Wassman, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Marguerite 1 ma, Recording Secretary • •