HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995_12_21 Board of Architectural Review Minutes AMENDED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK
DECEMBER 21, 1995, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER
740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD,
MAMARONECK, NEW YORK
Present: E. Robert Wassman, Chairman
Robert M. Immerman
Edward Z. Jacobson 46.1111
Pamela T. Washington 105 fe
Absent: Joan Williams ,&
Also Present: William Gerety a( ►
Assistant Building Inspector
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Wassman at 8:02 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Wassman announced that there were three members of the Board present, the Board has a quorum
present to approve the Minutes and that the Dino Oil Company, Inc. application has again been withdrawn
due to illness.
Mr. Wassman stated for the record that due to the fact that the applicant, DINO OIL INC. -2517 Boston
Post Road - Block 504 Lot 101 - Signs, called at 4:25 p.m. on November 16, 1995 to cancel their
appearance and reschedule it for the December meeting, the Board of Architectural Review meeting was
cancelled as it was the only item on the Agenda.
On motion of duly made by Mr. Wassman, seconded by Mr. Immerman, the Minutes of September 21,
1995 as amended were unanimously approved.
On motion of duly made by Mr. Jacobson, seconded by Mr. Immerman, the Minutes of October 12, 1995
were unanimously approved.
Ms. Washington arrived for the meeting. Four members are now present. Majority decisions will prevail.
Mr. Wassman said that the Board had just voted on the Minutes of the September 21, 1995 and October
12, 1995.
Ms. Washington said that on the item CVS/Pharmacy - 1310 Boston Post Road - Block 410 lot 463 -
Sign "24 Hours" the applicant did not use the same color red for the sign, it was more orange than the
original color.
On a motion made by Mr. Wassman, duly seconded and unanimously approved, the Building Department
will notify CVS that the color of the 24 Hours sign does not agree with the application's approval, which
was to have a red sign the same color as the CVS red.
DINO OIL INC. - 2517 Boston Post Road - Block 504 Lot 101 - Signs - application has again been
withdrawn due to illness.
Board of Architectural Review
December 21, 1995
Page 2
Mr. Wassman then stated for the enlightenment of the Board that he had received a memorandum dated
December 11, 1995 from Walter Bogner, chairman of the Village of Larchmont Architectural Review
Board inviting the Town of Mamaroneck Board of Architectural Review to a joint meeting to be held
January 17, 1996 in the Larchmont Village Center to hear a presentation by Nora Lucas the historical
preservationist and Larchmont Historical Society trustee. Mr. Wassman said that due to the conflict of
scheduling with a few of the officers of the Town, the meeting will be rescheduled to January 31, 1996.
When notice is received at a later date, it will be verified.
Chairman Wassman read the following applications before the Board:
SITE PLAN APPLICATION-Robert Stanziale/Frank&Antoinette Aurrichio-633-635 Fifth Avenue
- Block 132 Lot 175 & 643
SPECIAL USE PERMIT - Robert Stanziale - SavATree - 635 Fifth Avenue - Block 132 Lot 175 &
643
Mr. Wassman said for the enlightenment of the Board and all present that a memorandum was received
from Marilyn Reader dated November 27, 1995 regarding consideration of Site Plan Application and
Consideration of Special Use Permit as stated above, regarding referral to the Board of Architectural
Review (B.A.R.) for advisory input. There was an Environmental Impact Application filed on this and
the Planning Board is the Lead Agency. Mr. Wassman read correspondence received after the hearing,
and said the applicant is represented tonight by Mr. Stanziale.
Mr. Stanziale appeared for the applicant stating for the record that there was a continuation of the Public
Hearing which is still open for the Planning Board, awaiting B.A.R. advisory input. Mr. Stanziale stated
that clarification was made by the applicant as to what materials will be stored. There was a condition that
will be read into the resolution that there will not be any pesticides stored on the property by SavATree
who is in the tree maintenance business primarily working out of their Bedford location. The Fifth Avenue
address is known as their satellite office. They will have the second floor of this office structure. There
are two applicants, RoseAnn Land Development, once known as Premium Landscaping, and SavATree,
who will utilize one side of the property and the second floor of the building. RosAnn will occupy the
other side of the property and the first floor. The only modification is in the terms of nonconforming use.
There will be only a slight increase in the paved area, and organization of the parking spaces including a
handicap space. Evergreens will be planted to get a solid screen from Fifth Avenue.
Mr. Immerman asked if the chain link fence would remain.
Mr. Stanziale said it would remain. Mr. Stanziale presented pictures to the Board and a discussion
followed.
Ms. Washington said the building does not have a one-story addition in the front of it, but rises two stories
from the sidewalk at the street side. Ms. Washington stated the applicant is not proposing to do any work
to the building.
Mr. Wassman asked if the second floor was currently office space.
Mr. Stanziale stated that currently the space was partially used by Mr. Aurrichio and a real estate agent.
The second floor will be occupied solely by SavATree.
Mr. Wassman asked if Mr. Stanziale was familiar with the required screening for a dumpster.
Mr. Stanziale said screening was a solid fence.
Mr. Wassman said there is a Town specification and the applicant must comply with it.
Board of Architectural Review
December 21, 1995
Page 3
Mr. Stanziale stated that the SavATree sign and RosAnn sign should be separated strictly for identification,
and the color of the sign will be a mahogany sign with a gold letters.
A discussion followed regarding the placement of the sign and contents.
Mr. Wassman suggested moving the fence further inside the property, so the plantings are on the street
side screening the fence. Each tenant of the site should be treated equally and have different signs
displayed, not the pole sign.
Mr. Gerety said the pole sign would have to be removed in one year.
Ms. Washington said there is a new sign ordinance which phased out pole signs this past summer.
Mr. Wassman said the Board would like to see the fence moved. For the purpose of security the Board
could recommend to Zoning that it be approved as a relocated 6 ft. fence. Mr. Wassman said wording
could be that the existing chain link fence be complimented with shrubbery to improve the appearance of
the property.
Ms. Washington said technically the fence is on the property line.
Mr. Wassman said according to the law the applicant has a year in which to change the pole sign. The
applicant will have to make a conscientious effort to change the pole sign to conform.
Mr. Immerman said the Board would recommend that both signs be treated similarly.
Ms. Washington said she would encourage the applicant to have the signs one on each side of the driveway
where the parking spaces are and not on the secondary driveway.
Mr. Wassman said that the Board tries to develop an aesthetic continuity in uniformity of property, and
has some problems with the rear of the property berm.
Mr. Stan7iale said it actually is mulch, which the owner has indicated will eventually be planted. It may
eventually be subdivided as an accessory lot for Collins Brothers.
Mr. Wassman entered into the record a letter to Marilyn Reader, Chairman of the Planning Board, from
Beatrice Powers, 33 Maxwell Avenue, Larchmont as follows:
I have reviewed the files of the Building Department today and did not see the wood chip berm,
which currently runs 3/4 of the length of the property line along the thruway boundary. This
berm helps to absorb noise and creates a more pleasing view from my property. I would hope
that this berm should be extended along the entire length of the thruway boundary and remain
permanent. Thank you for any assistance you can offer in the matter.
Ms. Washington was in favor of the recommendation.
Mr. Wassman stated that a berm would take up a lot of land, which is valuable, compared to a line of
shrubbery or trees.
Mr. Stanziale said the applicant would be willing to extend the berm.
Mr. Jacobson said that in lieu of the berm, consideration should be given to planting white pines or other
evergreens.
Mr. Wassman said if the berm is continued, hopefully the owner would plant some trees/flowers.
Board of Architectural Review
December 21, 1995
Page 4
Mr. Wassman said the resolution would have to state that the owner will extend the existing berm at an
approximate 8 ft. height across the back of his property accomplishing same within a reasonable time,
twelve (12) months, built up as evenly as possible in the back of the property. Once this is established,
the Board would encourage the owner to plant shrubbery.
Upon a motion made by Mr. Wassman, duly seconded and unanimously approved, it is resolved that the
applicants application is approved subject to the following:
1. That the chain link fence along the Fifth Avenue frontage be moved behind the new
evergreen plantings;
2. That the monument sign for SavATree have added to it the street number designation and
telephone number in reasonable proportion to the rest of the lettering;
3. The existing pole sign will, by the sign ordinance, need to be removed in one year's
time. The Board recommends that there be some uniformity between the SavATree sign
and the pole sign if it remains.
4. The height of the sign itself is 3 ft. and overall about 4 to 4-1/2 ft. unilluminated sign;
the maximum overall height not to exceed 6' 0".
5. The location of the proposed dumpsters to be screened in accordance with the Town
Ordinance;
6. The rear property line to have a berm created approximately 8 ft. high across the rear,
accomplished within reasonable time, i.e. one year, and possibly at a later date
consideration be given to planting; the purpose of the berm being to provide screening
in lieu of some other method;
7. The mature trees on the property to remain.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:53 p.m.
Marguerite Ro , Recording Secretary