Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998_04_06 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK APRIL 6 , 1998, IN THE COURT ROOM, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Thomas E. Gunther, Chairman Patrick B. Kelleher Jillian A. Martin Arthur Wexler Absent: J. Rene Simon (due to illness and death in the family) Also Present: Robert S. Davis, Counsel Ronald A. Carpaneto, Director of Building Michelle Nieto, Public Stenographer Terranova, Kazazes & Associates, Ltd. 49 Eighth Street New Rochelle, New York 10801 Marguerite Roma, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gunther at 7:48 p.m. The Secretary read the application as follows: APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 2302 (adjourned 2/10/98; 3/25/98) Application of GLSN Realty Corp. requesting a variance to construct an addition to the front of the existing building. The addition to be constructed on the existing building and lot has an existing floor area of 73% and proposes a floor area of 83% where a floor area of 50% is permitted pursuant to Section 240-45C,has an existing lot coverage of 73% and proposes a lot coverage of 90% where 25% lot coverage is permitted pursuant to Section 240-45A(3), has an existing width at the front lot line of 50 ft. where 150 ft. is required pursuant to Section 240-45A(2),and proposes to add no parking spaces where the addition of three (3)parking spaces is required pursuant to Section 240-78;and further, the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in a Business Zone District on the premises located at 176 Myrtle Blvd. and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 133 Lot 642. Mr. Gunther asked if the applicant is present. Jeff Meighan, attorney for the applicant, asked if the Board can wait a few minutes, as his client and Mr. &Mrs. Coughlin are trying to work out a few last minute details. They have been meeting and trying to work out a compromise. Mr. Gunther asked Mr. Meighan to advise his client and Mr. &Mrs. Coughlin that the Board is waiting for them to start the special meeting. The meeting reconvened at 7:55 p.m. Mr. Meighan said presentation was previously made and asked Mr. Coughlin if he wished to comment. Zoning Board April 6, 1998 Page 2 Mr. Gunther asked Mr. Meighan if he had anything to add, after which he will open the meeting for public comments. Mr. Meighan said an agreement has been reached whereby the applicant will lower the parapet. He would like to amend the application to lower the structure by 6 inches in the height of the parapet. Mr. Mazin interrupted at this point. Mr. Gunther asked Mr. Mazin to wait until after the applicant makes his comments. Mr. Gaits, architect for the applicant, stated they tried to work closely with the Coughlin Insurance Group. The applicant has agreed to reduce the height of the parapet by 6 in. Instead of 17 ft. the proposal will be 16 ft. 6 in.. Mr. Gaita referred to a rendering to show what the proposal will look like. Mr. Gait: stated the presentation was made at the previous meetings, unless there are some further questions. Ms. Martin asked what the objection was to the parapet. Mr. Meighan said the Coughlin's can address that issue. Mr. Gunther said that was not necessary. Mr. Wexler stated that Mr. Mazin said the objection isn't to the height of the building, but relates to a point on the building next door and asked if that was correct. Mr. Mazin, attorney for the Coughlin Group, said after discussions with the applicant, his client and the architect, his client was satisfied that the estimated building height will not exceed the lower sill of the top floor window which was estimated to be 16 ft. 6 in. and demonstrated on the rendering before the Board; i.e. not to exceed the lower portion of the window rim on the top floor of the top of the building. In addition he indicated the applicant had agreed to the following: the applicant will engage Coughlin's sign man, at the applicant's cost and expense, to raise the Coughlin signage from its present location on the side of Coughlin building to a location above the top window,as is agreeable and approved by Coughlin. Mr. Mazin said this is subject to approval by the Board of Architectural (BAR), as discussed with Bob Davis. Mr. Mazin said he would like that to be a condition of approval. Mr. Wexler said the Coughlin's came to the Board for the sign, which was on the perpendicular face of the building. Now the sign will be lifted above the parapet portion of their building,and asked Mr. Davis if the Coughlin's have to come again before the Zoning Board. Mr. Davis said the Coughlin's have to come before the Zoning Board because the original variance has to be modified. A discussion ensued regarding when the variance was granted and under what conditions. Mr. Mazin said the applicant also agreed while the sign is being moved the letters can be cleaned, replaced as needed and the holes filled. Mr. Gunther asked if there were any other comments. John Coughlin appeared before the Board and thanked the Board for postponing the application until this evening so the plans could be reviewed. Mr. Coughlin commented on various problems that resulted due to the fire damage. Mr. Coughlin said they are pleased to work with Mr. Shkreli, like the design of the building and stated it would be an economic hardship if signage was lost. Mr. Coughlin said his sons own the insurance agency, are present because they also have an economic interest in the situation and urge approval. Mr. Coughlin asked if the Board has the authority to approve or must they go before the BAR. Mr. Davis said the Zoning Board cannot take the BAR's authority away from them. Zoning Board April 6, 1998 Page 3 ® Mr. Gunther said the Board is authorized to approve a variance to the zoning law. Mr. Coughlin asked if it is possible for those present to agree and have someone else veto it. Mr. Wexler asked if Mr. Coughlin's primary sign is also on the parapet. Mr. Coughlin said the sign is the same level. Mr. Kelleher said in answer to Mr. Coughlin's question, theoretically yes. The BAR has basically passed on the signage on the side. Now the signage will be moved. Mr. Davis said the Board's resolution could note with approval the cooperation of the neighbors. Mr. Carpaneto said the BAR would probably pass the change. Mr. Gunther asked if there were any other comments from the public. Ned Ferrarone, the owner of Madison-Larchmont, Inc., and a tenant in the Coughlin building, appeared. Mr. Ferrarone does not have a problem with the building, but is concerned about the parking situation. The existing building has zero parking. The expansion will require additional spaces. Mr. Ferrarone then stated his experience with the Building Department when applying to expand the use of his building and was not allowed due to the fact no additional parking could be provided. Mr. Wexler stated at a previous meeting the applicant agreed to apply for permit parking for those three (3) spots that are coming up that is sufficient and keep that in with the variance. The question that resolves, is the employee parking. A discussion ensued regarding the square footage Mr. Ferrarone proposed to add to his building and the problems with permit parking. Mr. Wexler suggested Mr. Ferrarone contact the Town Board regarding restructuring the permit parking issue. Mr. Carpaneto said there is currently before the Town Board a proposal for diagonal parking on Myrtle Boulevard. Mr. Ferrarone said he does not object to the proposed application, just the additional parking that is needed. Proposal have been made to the Supervisor, Ms. Price, and he has had no reply. There are a number of potential solutions. On-street parking on the side streets is taken by Town employees, who can park in the Town yard freeing up spaces. Mr. Ferrarone offered to pave spaces in the Town yard to provide that parking, but has had no reply. Mr. Wexler suggested Mr. Ferrarone appear at a Town Board meeting with a group of merchants regarding this issue, as opposed to appearing as an individual. Mr. Gunther asked if there are any other comments from the public. Mr. Mazin thanked the Board. For the record, his clients go along with the conditions stated and the fact that the applicant was kind enough to meet with them. Michael Coughlin questioned where is the diagonal parking proposed. Mr. Carpaneto said the proposed diagonal parking, approximately seventeen to twenty-five spaces, is on Myrtle Boulevard. Zoning Board April 6, 1998 Page 4 Mr. Gunther asked if there were any other questions. There being none, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Ms. Martin, the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously, 4-0. RESOLVED, that this is an Unlisted Action and based upon review of the Short Environmental Assessment Form(EAF) the Board concludes that the action as proposed will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact pursuant to SEQRA; and, therefore, a Negative Declaration shall be issued. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Ms. Martin, the following resolution was ADOPTED: WHEREAS, GLSN Realty Corp. has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct an addition to the front of the existing building. The addition to be constructed on the existing building and lot has an existing floor area of 73% and proposes a floor area of 83% where a floor area of 50% is permitted pursuant to Section 240-45C, has an existing lot coverage of 73% and proposes a lot coverage of 90% where 25% lot coverage is permitted pursuant to Section 240-45A(3),has an existing width at the front lot line of 50 ft. where 150 ft. is required pursuant to Section 240-45A(2), and proposes to add no parking spaces where the addition of three (3) parking spaces is required pursuant to Section 240-78; and further, the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in a Business Zone District on the premises located at 176 Myrtle Blvd. and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 133 Lot 642; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has 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 Section 240-45C, Section 240-45A(3), Section 240-45A(2), Section 240-78, Section 240-69; and WHEREAS, GLSN Realty Corp. submitted an application for a variance to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has 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 hearing thereon; 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 that the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood if the variance sought is granted. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors: A. No undesirable change will occur. It will help to solidify this part of the Town. B. The applicant cannot achieve his goals via any other method. It is a preexisting building on a lot that is narrower than what is required by zoning. It is setback further than any other building on that street. By bringing the building out, it will be more in conformity with the building line of the street and will be a better presence to the community as a commercial street. C. Given the existing size of the building on the lot, it is not substantial in nature. D. It will have a positive impact on the physical conditions of the neighborhood. E. The applicant's difficulty is not self-created. F. The granting of this variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Zoning Board April 6, 1998 Page 5 G. The variance is the minimum necessary to achieve the applicant's goals and 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. H. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land/or building, and the variance granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant or its successors and assigns, as appropriate, apply for three (3) off-street parking permits and, if awarded the permits, secure and maintain them for length of time the building is in existence, so long as the law permits. 2. The plans be amended so that the top of the parapet of the front facade is no higher than the bottom of the window sill on the top floor of the adjacent building, known as the Coughlin Building. 3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of this Resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six(6)months and completed within two (2) years of the date of said permit. 5. Construction shall be in substantial compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. Mr. Gunther informed the applicant to see the Building Department during regular business hours to obtain a building permit. ADJOURNMENT On a motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. / / )0, 1 / Margu e�ecording Secretary 'rr./