Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991_03_21 Board of Architectural Review Minutes MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW MEETING OF MARCH 21, 1991 IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: E. Robert Wassman, Chairman Robert Immerman, member Pamela Washington, member William Jakubowski, Building Inspector Elaine Price, Councilwoman Steven Silverberg, Counsel Christa Diels, Recorder Gordon Oppenheimer, Town resident Steven Kronenberg, Town resident Several other Town residents Absent: Ralph Heisel, member Joan Williams, member CALL TO ORDER The meeting commenced at 8:07 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS Approval of Minutes - Several minor revisions to the Minutes of the February 21, 1991 meeting were suggested or requested. Next meeting - The next meeting will be held on April 25, 1991 at 8:00 P.M. in the Senior Center of the Town Center. Other matters - Mr. Wassman requested that the agenda be sent to the applicants as well as the BAR members. Mr. Wassman informed the applicants that, because only three of the five board members were present, a unanimous vote is required to sustain a favorable opinion on each application. Any applicant, if he so desires, may request that the application be held over until the next meeting, keeping in mind, however, that all members may not be present then either. APPLICATIONS PRESENTED 1. TEN GRAND, INC. (formerly Hory Chevrolet) Boston Post Road and Weaver Street Block 410, Lot 5 Exterior alterations Mr. Wassman stated that this a Type II action; therefore, there is no need for further environmental review. Mr. Fred Coleman, an architect from Bianco and Pepe. Inc. and Mr. Donald BAR Minutes March 21, 1991 Page 2 Mazin, an attorney, represented the applicant, NYNEX Mobile Communications Corporation. The store will sell and install only mobile telephones. It is a separate and distinct corporation within the NYNEX family of corporations and is not a "phone store" per se. Mr. Mazin displayed several exhibits with photographs, drawings and models of the proposed changes. Mr. Coleman explained that although they intend to keep the exterior perimeter as it is, they will change all of the windows, use new thermopane glazing and new insulated panels. They will get rid of the industrial sash and create a metal facade that will wrap around on the Weaver Street side and return around the back. They will paint the brick with masonry paint so that the brick character will remain, and the landscaping will be "generous". Mr. Jakubowski provided the Board with a brief history of Ferndale Street At one time, the Town, believing that it owned the property, leased the entire street to Hory Chevrolet. When Hory Chevrolet began selling boats, it was discovered that Ten Grand owned a portion of the property next to the bank. Consequently, Hory Chevrolet vacated Ten Grand's side of what was then Ferndale Place. At present, half of the street belongs to Finast and half belongs to Hory Chevrolet. The electric panel that still exists probably dates back to the days when the property was for used car sales. The Building Inspector said that that panel would have to be removed, but he was uncertain whether that was part of the application currently under consideration. Ms. Washington asked the applicants whether they had considered increasing the number and variety of plantings. Mr. Coleman responded that they were trying to create a screen of plantings between the NYNEX property and the residential property. When Ms. Washington suggested that some bushes be planted between the trees in the back of the property, Mr. Coleman said that the heat and exhaust from the cars would probably kill the bushes; therefore, they would most likely put gravel in between the trees. Mr. Immerman noticed two existing trees and requested that another one be planted as you turn into the parking lot; however, Mr. Coleman expressed concern about a visibility problem, expecially on the corner. Mr. Wassman said that the BAR would like a 10-15% increase in the rear plantings; however, he felt that if the plantings were too dense, they would turn into a catch-all for litter. Mr. Immerman said that he was uncertain from the site plans whether the lighting fixtures would be removed. If so, what will the new fixtures look like? Mr. Jakubowski said that illumination of 4.2 candles meets the minimum lighting standards. Mr. Coleman assured the BAR that the illumination would be from high pressure sodium lamps, which are color-free. The design submitted by Mr. Coleman indicates that he will use a 30-foot mounting height by Hubble Lighting Division for illumination posts and color-corrected lamps. All existing site lighting will be removed. Mr. Immerman felt that NYNEX could not possibly need the seventy-one existing parking spaces. Mr. Jakubowski acknowledged that seventy-one spaces are in excess of NYNEX's current needs; however, based on the square footage of the site, that number is not in excess. Moreover, if the building were ever converted into a retail sales store, they would need a parking lot of that size. Mr. Coleman assured the BAR that NYNEX has no intention of linking the property with the Finast property. BAR Minutes March 21, 1991 Page 3 Mr. Steven Kronenberg, a Town resident, voiced his feelings and concern about the proposed changes. He felt that because the same organization owns both the NYNEX and Finast properties, the Town has been presented with a "unique opportunity to achieve architectural unity. " He would prefer a project in which Finast agrees to have the same design as NYNEX. Mr. Wassman informed Mr. Kronenberg that, rather than "architectural unity" [or architectural monotony] the BAR's primary concern is architectural compatibility. Moreover, the BAR cannot saddle one applicant with a requirement that depends on another. The BAR will treat each application as it is presented, but one application cannot be tied to, or delayed, because of another. Mr. Silverman explained the matter further by pointing out that when the Finast property is altered, it, too, will be brought before the BAR. NYNEX will then be a pre-existing property. Any other, newer structures would not have to match NYNEX; however, they must come before the BAR, which is, of course, concerned with how the buildings relate to one another. Mr. Gordon Oppenheimer, another Town resident, expressed two concerns: First, he finds the proposed black roof of NYNEX "offensive" , and requested that the facade be lifted higher in order to hide the entire roof. In addition, he asked for assurance that there would be no more tenants allowed in the building. Mr. Wassman responded that Mr. Oppenheimer's view of the roof is based on how it is now. Mr. Coleman's plans indicate that the facade is going to be raised six feet; any further increase will be disproportionate and will not do justice to the structure. Mr. Jakubowski explained that, if they wanted to have another tenant (i.e. , if the building were going to be subdivided) , site plan would be required. At present, the lease indicates that there will be only one tenant -- NYNEX. The plan that has been submitted as part of this application shows that the property and parking lot on this parcel go to the center line of what used to be Ferndale Place; therefore, if Finast wishes to take a piece of the property, both parcels would have to go before the Planning Board again. Mr. Wassman took the floor and made the following recommendations: 1. The shrubbery in the area to the north of the property will be increased to a reasonable degree There will be a 15% increase in the number of trees. 2. . .Unless the architect has some reasonable objection, an extra tree should be planted near the corner. [Mr. Jakubowski advised checking the New York State Department of Transportation regulations regarding street trees, especially those on or near corners] . 3. The above-ground exterior oil tank must be removed. 4. NYNEX must get a guarantee from the nursery that all plantings will last not less than one year. If the nursery will not supply that guarantee, then NYNEX should supply the BAR with a bond. [Mr. Silverberg reminded the applicants that the BAR's approval, like the approval of other boards, is contingent upon the conditions being met; therefore, if the plantings die, they are to be replaced] . BAR Minutes March 21, 1991 Page 4 5. The signage to be submitted by NYNEX will be located in the locations shown on, and will be of the dimensions indicated, in the application. 6. The parking stanchions will be gray lightposts as specified and will be color-corrected lamps. The BAR approved the application with the above conditions. 3. 685 WEAVER STREET Town of Mamaroneck, owner Block 103, Lot 5 Reconstruct entrance Mr. Wassman stated that this is a Type II action; therefore, there is no need for further environmental review. Mr. Steven Altieri, the Town Administrator, represented the applicant, the Town of Mamaroneck. The Town of Mamaroneck is conducting improvements at 685 Weaver Street (currently the Monroe Nursery School) for the operation of a daycare center by a private provider as well as for the operation of the Town of Mamaroneck's Recreation Day Camp. Mr. Altieri explained that he attended the BAR meeting primarily to discuss the construction of a new entranceway and ramp. Mr. Altieri then introduced Mr. Andrew Fredman, the architect, who elaborated on the plans for the project. The Town is trying to legalize the building and make it consistent with the New York State Building code for day care use. That mandates that certain egress requirements are met, specifically for C-6.1 and C-6.2 use, which relate to children younger and older than three years of age. The ramp to the outside and the doors must be changed, preferably to a style that is consistent with the rest of the building. The posts that hold up the roof over the entrance match the rear of the building. The concrete ramp will be stuccoed and hidden by plantings. More ventilation must be provided and a change of windows is required because of the location of the fire stair inside. With the exception of the the removal of one tree, all plantings will remain. Mr. Fredman explained that these "no frills" plans are "strictly code-generated". The Town is aware that the building is not an ideal one for a daycare center; however, "it's what we've got." They are trying to squeeze as many children as possible into the given space (approximately forty-four children at thirty-five square feet per child) . Mr. Jakubowski viewed the proposed changes as the best way to provide egress and still conform to the codes. The Westchester County Department of Health and Social Services will also review the plans for the day camp. The Building Inspector further noted that he and the applicants had gone through the addendum regarding the fire safety concerns. He felt that if the Town had to appear before the BAR again for changes other than those that could be resolved at this meeting, it would be counterproductive to the Town, particularly in terms of getting ready for the Recreation Day Camp. Although the camp is scheduled to begin on July 4, 1991, the Recreation Department needs three to four weeks to set up and prepare for it. BAR Minutes March 21, 1991 Page 5 Mr. Wassman requested the BAR to consider the following amendments to the application: 1. Shrubbery must be planted around the new entrance and a site plan showing the new shrubbery must be submitted for the record to the Building Inspector's office. 2. The posts and railings of the porch must be changed and made compatible with the east elevation materials. The wrought iron one that is currently in place is to be removed. The railings will be suitable for use by the handicapped. All BAR members voted in favor of the amended application. 4. NORTHVILLE GASOLINE CORPORATION 2515-2517 Boston Post Road Block 504, Lots 101 and 121 Sign application Mr. Wassman stated that this is a Type II application; therefore, no further environmental review is required. Due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Silverberg stepped away from the meeting during the review of this application. Mr. Marty Smith, from the Northville Gasoline Corporation Operations Office on Long Island, represented the corporation. Mr. Smith explained that the Northville Corporation has about seventy stations in the area, all of which have standard identification signs. Underneath the identification sign is a three-product price sign which advertises the price of each of the three grades of gasoline. Mr. Smith stated that Northville would like to put the three-product price sign on the existing corner pole. Mr. Wassman felt that this application conforms to the sign ordinance and that the three-product pole-mounted price sign is customary to the trade; however, he observed that there is only one other gas station on the Boston Post Road with a price display, but that one is not on a corner lot pole. Mr. Wassman feels that a price display sign on the corner pole would pose an impairment to safety and good vision; perhaps the sign could be placed on the pumps, the stanchions or at the opposite corner of the lot, away from the side street intersection. Mr. Jakubowski entered the conversation to point out to Mr. Wassman that the reason he had seen so few price display signs, especially in Mamaroneck, is that the Building Inspector considers them temporary signs. A temporary sign is one that advertises for sale a product intended to be available for a limited period of time. Since gasoline prices are subject to change, they certainly fall into that category. Furthermore, Mr. Jakubowski informed the BAR that, if a separate pole is required, then he has to have two variances: one for the sign itself and BAR Minutes March 21, 1991 Page 6 another for the separate pole sign. If the frontage is greater than 150 feet, then two signs are allowed, but the Inspector doubted that Northville had more than 150 feet on the Boston Post Road. Mr. Jakubowski noted that the signs indicating the type of service offered (i.e. , full or self service) are "directional" rather than real signs. Mr. Wassman felt that the above-mentioned "temporary sign" interpretation was a facetious one. The sign, he reiterated, is inappropriate at the position indicated on the application. The applicant may relocate it and make it part of this application or he may return at a later date with another application. Mr. Wassman's suggestions for different sign locations included one of the stanchions of the canopy on one of the two islands and a similar pole placed on another corner of the lot (near the Volkswagen dealer) , away from the corner. Mr. 'merman felt that he could not vote in favor of the application until he has reexamined the lot. Consequently, approval will be held in abeyance until the next meeting, at which time Mr. Smith will present an amended application. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 P.M.