Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997_06_19 Board of Architectural Review Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JUNE 19, 1997, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 11 „„s, Present: Edward Z. Jacobson, Chairman Robert M. Immerman Lucian J. Leone °� RECtrit° Anthony Spagnola 31 E. Robert Wassman pp - tool.DAIX00 I Absent: Pamela T. Washington Ir E Also Present: William Gerety Assistant Building Inspector CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jacobson at 8:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon a motion made by Mr. Wassman, seconded by Mr. Immerman, the Minutes of the May 15, 1997 meeting were unanimously approved. Mr. Jacobson informed the Board about a note received from the secretary that transcribes the Minutes, which stated that the applicant's need to identify themselves and speak clearly. The Board must do so as well. Often when papers are shuffled it is difficult to hear the recorded conversations, and Mr. Jacobson asked that everyone do their best in that regard. Chairman Jacobson read the application as follows: AUGIE'S RESTAURANT -2417 Boston Post Road - Block 505 Lot 446 - awnings/signage Augie Vitieiro, the owner of Augie's Restaurant appeared. Mr. Jacobson reviewed the issues discussed at the last meeting. The Board asked Mr. Vitieiro to supply a sample of the fabric, preferable in a striped pattern, which has been done. It was acceptable that the color be red. Mr. Vitieiro should arrange with the landlord to have the upper part of the street facade painted, and the sign on the side wall shall be removed as soon as possible. Mr. Jacobson noted that the pole sign may remain in place until March 7, 1998 when it will no longer be permitted and that the planting in the barrels be maintained. Mr. Jacobson asked Mr. Vitieiro if he had had a discussion with the landlord about painting the upper part of the front facade. Mr. Vitieiro said all the items discussed with the Board have been or will be done. Mr. Wassman questioned the shape of the awning, stating that at the last meeting Mr. Vitieiro said he would be using the existing frames, rather than a single frame. Nothing was stated in the resolution as to what the frames would be used. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Jacobson said the Board accepted the applicant's statement that it would be too expensive to replace the frames, hence the use of the existing frames. Mr. Jacobson said there is a vertical surface that will be a solid color on which the name of the restaurant will appear. Mr. Vitieiro said the solid color will be red and the lettering will be white. Mr. Jacobson asked the Board if there were any comments regarding the pattern. Mr. Wassman said it complies with the Board's request. On a motion made by Mr. Leone, seconded by Mr. Spagnola, the following resolution was unanimously ADOPTED: WHEREAS, AUGIE'S RESTAURANT - 2417 Boston Post Road - Block 505 Lot 446 - has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans for awnings/signage; 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 WHEREAS, AUGIE'S RESTAURANT 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 GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. The color and pattern of the fabric as submitted this date are approved. Chairman Jacobson read the next application as follows: JOHN J. McINTYRE - 176 Myrtle Boulevard - Block 133 Lot 642 - front facade & sign band Dennis Cuccinella, the draftsman of record, and Victor G. Carosi, the engineer working with Dr. McIntyre for the renovation of 176 Myrtle Boulevard, appeared. Dr. McIntyre could not be present at the meeting this evening. Mr. Jacobson said two sets of drawings were received, one marked revised, and asked for an explanation of the revision. Mr. Carosi said the revision was for the area of the signage, which was not defined on the first drawing. Mr. Cuccinella said that after preparing the design studies for the rebuilding, Dr. McIntyre chose the combination of the 18 in. brick band below the windows and the mansard style roof. Mr. Carosi said Dr. McIntyre felt he had an opportunity to improve the existing building and bring some detail to what has been an otherwise bland building. Mr. Carosi said some improvements had been done recently with the red brick paving and the trees. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 3 Mr. Immerman said the prior improvements also included the flower beds or shrub planting areas. Mr. Immerman said the Board would need a plan reflecting any changes. The door is in a different location now, and changes to the planting areas would result. Mr. Jacobson asked what determined the size of the added roof. Mr. Carosi said the roof was proportioned, so it would not be too intrusive. Mr. Wassman asked if awnings were considered. Mr. Cuccinella said awnings were considered as an option, but he felt they could present a long-term maintenance problem. A more permanent structure would require less maintenance. Mr. Leone said he has read quite a bit of critical material about mansards and questioned whether it was appropriate here. Mr. Leone asked if there would be options to consider similar to those used on shops up the street. Mr. Carosi said there was thought of taking some of the detail used on one of the buildings up the street; i.e. a spanish style roof treatment, but Dr. McIntyre did not look too favorable on that suggestion. Mr. Carosi then suggested to Dr. McIntyre the possible use of a slate roof to try to retain some type of character. Mr. Immerman said the building does not have much in the way of architecture, it is just glass and sign. Mr. Immerman feels Mr. Cuccinella and Mr. Carosi are trying too hard. The sign bands presented are nice, but if the graphics had some unity and awnings were used it might be better. Mr. Immerman said the awning would be a great addition if it is the right scale. Mr. Jacobson said the Board's interest is really to improve the street scape and try to get some continuity. Mr. Carosi asked if awnings as discussed could have signage on them, and would the Board prefer an opaque background and illuminated lettering. Mr. Wassman said the awnings could have signage on them, but not an internally lit awning. Mr. Jacobson said in regard to the lighting, the applicant probably needs to think about the lighting of the facade and various methods to achieve same. Mr. Spagnola said that consideration should be given to painting the existing brick work. Mr. Carosi said they are very much interested in removing the aluminum, and in speaking with the contractors in the area it was stated that the color of the existing brick cannot be matched. Mr. Jacobson mentioned that Mr. Spagnola had made an interesting point about consideration being given for painting the facade. Mr. Jacobson said the existing brick is not the most wonderful color, the impact of awnings and painted brick would certainly be more beneficial. Mr. Jacobson said the plantings in the planting areas need to be stronger; i.e. taller. Mr. Immerman asked that the applicant supply options on the awning shape and color schemes; i.e color on the lighter side. Mr. Immerman is pleased with the fact that a mansard roof will not be used. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 4 Mr. Carosi said the awning would probably be a waterfall type with an 18 inch projection, and asked if the Board would want a crank-out awning. Mr. Carosi was advised to look at the buildings up the street. Mr. Jacobson said scale is an issue, and said 18 inches does not do much. He also informed Mr. Carosi that the shops in question have a sun problem during the day, they would welcome the shade that an awning could provide for those large areas of glass and suggested the applicant not be skimpy. Mr. Immerman said it would be his opinion not to consider round ones. Mr. Gerety said the Building Department would like the Board to make the applicant and the owner aware that while this process is on-going that the building the way it stands is practically in violation and efforts should be made to remove the signage currently there and cleanup the facade. This process will not grant the applicant the time line to not do any work at all. Mr. Cucinnella said the owner is anxious to proceed with the rehabilitation of the building,and has permits to proceed with removing the signs, clean out the building and to start rebuilding it. However, there is some difficulty obtaining the final go-ahead from the insurance company. Dr. McIntyre requested some type of letter be sent the Building Department to the insurance company or Dr. McIntyre, stating they will be in violation soon to accelerate the process. Mr. Jacobson said as of this moment Dr. McIntyre is put on notice that the building is in violation and the signage needs to come down as soon as possible. Mr. Immerman asked if the applicant studied the removal of the cellar doors. Mr. Carosi said the cellar doors were studied, but if eliminated there is no accessibility to the cellar from the rear of the building. The building is built directly on top of the property line. There is no loading dock or rear loading area and if there is a restaurant or store in the future they defmitely will be using the cellar/basement for storage. There also is no accessibility from within the building to that basement area. Enhancing the existing trap doors, reenforcing them and continuing to utilize them would be in the best interests of the owner at the present time. Mr. Immerman said more thought should be given to this, because the exterior cellar doors are an encumbrance to the plaza, propose a hazard and a maintenance that would not be had if the doors were inside and accessible. Mr. Carosi said it poses a problem as far as transporting stored equipment or material through the store while customers are inside. Mr. Immerman asked if it was a selling point to have the doors on the outside. Mr. Carosi said it would be much easier. Mr. Immerman asked if any of the stores has access from the interior of the stores. Mr. Carosi said the chinese restaurant has access from the interior. Mr. Immerman said outside access to the cellar is archaic. Mr. Carosi said interior access was initially presented to the owner but was rejected. Mr. Immerman said the outside cellar doors should be reconsidered from a tenant's and landscape point of view. There are very few stores in Larchmont that have sidewalk stairs. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 5 411) Mr. Jacobson asked Mr. Carosi if the Board has sufficiently made it clear about the arrangement of the doors, and the cellar access. Mr. Carosi said it was sufficiently clear. On a motion made and seconded, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing on this application be, and hereby is, adjourned to the July 17, 1997 meeting. Chairman Jacobson read the next application as follows: MAMARONECK GARDENS, INC. - 100 through 348 Richbell Road -Block 408 Lot 290 -window replacement Dominick Tamaro, the attorney for the corporation, appeared and said the Mamaroneck Gardens, Inc. is a co-operative corporation. Also present is Stephanie Conte, the property manager for the site, and Michael Vicario, with Industrial Window Corp., the window contractor. Mr. Tamaro said the applicant proposes to replace the existing 2,100 windows, approximately 50 years old. The existing windows are metal framed casement windows which will be replaced with double-hung tilt aluminum windows, and presented pictures to the Board. The proposed replacement windows will insulate the apartments, add value, will be easier to maintain and keep clean because they tilt in, and will be provided with screens as currently not all windows have screens as they are odd shaped windows. The new color as proposed is bronze which will look better with the brick. Mr. Wassman asked if the company had black frames. Ms. Conte said the bronze frames will soften the building, the black frame sticks out. Mr. Immerman said he does not agree with that, and said there are also black shutters. Mr. Immerman asked why there are shutters in some places and not in others. Ms. Conte said because they are broken, missing and are horrible. Mr. Leone asked if the shutters can be eliminated completely. Mr. Tamaro said that could be considered. This is not a wealthy corporation, hence the maintenance problems. Mr. Jacobson said it was noted that there are many different size openings, and asked what combination of double-hung windows will be installed. Mr. Vicario said there are primarily 2 widths of paired windows that vary in height on the ground floor. In the 4 and 5 lite openings, there will be paired windows, and the 2 lite windows will be a single double- hung. Mr. Immerman said he would like to see presented to the Board how the masonry openings are going to be filled with the different types of combinations. ® Mr. Vicario said there are two types of combinations. Mr. Immerman asked if they are all the same height. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 6 Mr. Vicario said only on the ground floor are there various heights. The second and third floor are all the same height except for the bathroom. Mr. Immerman stated he was very impressed with the white punctuation of the windows in the apartment across the street and feels using anodized is wrong and will make a drab environment look more drab. Mr. Immerman said the use of white frames could make something that is very ordinary in a facade a little more special. Ms. Conte said glare could be a problem, the applicant did not want dirt and did not want the windows to be so conspicuous. Mr. Immerman said he was not sure about the glare, the dirt is a debatable issue, but the concern about conspicuous is wrong. The apartments across the street look much better than the applicant's property. Mr. Spagnola asked if the applicant is using windows with a baked enamel finish, and said the baked enamel finish could be white. Mr. Vicario said the proposed windows will be a backed enamel finish. Mr. Tamaro said the location of the property is unusual; i.e. part of the property is in the Village and part is located in the Town. Initially the applicant went to the Village and it was said there were no requirements, as far as an architectural review. By the time the applicant found out a permit was needed in the Town, windows were ordered. Work was stopped immediately and the applicant applied to the Board. Some windows have already been manufactured. Mr. Jacobson explained that the reason the applicant is before the Board is because it is the Board's responsibility to review changes regarding the visual appearance of properties, among other things. The Board's concern is that the community is made to look better. Mr. Jacobson said if the change in color was made, it would make a huge difference to the complex. The Board wants to communicate to the applicant that this residential complex could look so much better were it to have white windows, as an example. Mr. Tamaro said he represents a lot of buildings that have a brick exteriors, some have a white framed window and others have a darker bronze. Mr. Tamaro said he does not feel the bronze is an eye sore. Mr. Wassman said the Board is trying to improve the look of the complex and take it to another level. The Board realizes there is nothing wrong with a bronze colored window frame, but making them a color would make it all better. The windows are a big factor, there are 2,100 of them. Ms. Conte said they cannot afford to go back and change what has already been ordered and is done. The project would have to be stopped. Mr. Immerman said if that is the case, the applicant is wasting the Board's time if there is nothing that can be done about this and asked how many are in place. Mr. Vicario said the whole job was ordered, and one complete building on site is done and another building at the back is started. Mr. Jacobson said there is a potential to have 85% of the windows in the buildings white and asked the Board if they thought it was an important enough idea to tolerate a couple of buildings where the frames are not white in order to achieve something the Board is looking for. Mr. Wassman said only three triangular corners of buildings fall into the Board's jurisdiction. The majority of buildings are outside the Town border. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 7 After a considerable amount of discussion, on a motion made by Mr. Wassman, seconded by Mr. Spagnola, the following resolution was unanimously ADOPTED: WHEREAS, Mamaroneck Gardens, Inc. has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to replace windows in buildings 100 through 348 Richbell Road, Block 408 Lot 290; 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 WHEREAS, Mamaroneck Gardens, Inc.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 GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposal as presented is accepted. New windows with bronze frames are approved. Mr. Gerety asked that the applicant call the Building Department in the morning, as the building permit cannot be issued until a variance has been granted from the State. NEW MATTER Mr. Jacobson said before adjournment, something was presented to the Board at the last meeting that did not have sufficient information for review and asked for the status of same. Mr. Gerety said no additional information has been received on the matter presented at the last meeting for review that related to Tedesco Auto Repair. Mr. Gerety said Lexus has been adjourned and Tedesco is the auto body repair shop next to High Tech. Tedesco has not yet filed anything to go before this Board. It has been granted approval from the Planning Board, pending any approvals required from the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) and/or Zoning Board. Mr. Jacobson asked if anything has happened with regard to Pier I. Mr. Gerety said a submission was received to date, but it has not been reviewed by himself nor the building inspector. It should give enough detail to write a disapproval which will then go the Zoning Board for their review for the background area considered part of the signage. Once that is granted from the Zoning Board, then it will be an approved permit because the BAR approved everything else pending the outcome of the zoning for the signage on Pier I. Mr. Wassman asked if Stop & Shop has done anything about signage. Mr. Gerety said Stop & Shop has a company that has a subcontractor in Florida, who has another subcontractor in Massachusetts who said the application was mailed which the building department never received. The subcontractor in Massachusetts said they have had many problems with the post office. Mr. Jacobson asked if there was anymore new business. Board of Architectural Review June 19, 1997 Page 8 Mr. Gerety said the only additional new business is that Mr. Jakubowski has been granted his application for disability retirement by New York State and as of July 7, 1997 he will be resigning as building inspector. Mr. Jakubowski will be returning to the Building Department for an unspecified period until another building inspector is selected. Furthermore, Mr. Gerety has been offered and accepted the position of building inspector in the Village of Rye Brook and will be leaving as of July 15, 1997. The Board congratulated Mr. Gerety, and expressed their disappointment with the loss of both Mr. Jakubowski and Mr. Gerety, but wished Mr. Gerety the best of luck in his new position. Mr. Gerety said he will continue to be a concerned resident of the Town. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the BAR will be held on July 17, 1997. ADJOURNMENT On a motion duly made by Mr. Immerman and seconded, the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Marguerite R , Recording Secretary