Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998_05_21 Board of Architectural Review Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK MAY 21, 1998, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Edward Z. Jacobson, Chairman 111 ]� Robert M. Immerman ��Q � / Anthony Spagnola 4 My Pamela T. Washington RECEIVED Absent: Lucian J. Leone j1 JUN 11_1998 a. E. Robert Wassman PATRICIOCCIO TOA pjq ciaK ATAPANoNEcK Also Present: Ronald A. Carpaneto, Director of Building CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Jacobson at 8:05 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon a motion made by Mr. Spagnola, seconded by Mr. Immerman, the Minutes of the April 16, 1998 meeting were unanimously approved. Chairman Jacobson read the application as follows: COUGHLIN GROUP - 178 Myrtle Blvd. - Block 133 Lots 627.1 and 627.2 -relocate existing sign John Coughlin of The Coughlin Group, one of the owners of the building, addressed the Board. Mr. Coughlin stated he had attended a Zoning Board meeting and met with the applicant in reference to the Coughlin signage and the proposed reconstruction of the old Gold Lake building that was destroyed by fire, November 26, 1996. Mr. Coughlin said that the applicant's application will block The Coughlin Group sign. The applicant agreed to reimburse Mr. Coughlin for moving the Coughlin sign,if the Zoning Board granted approval of the application for the reconstruction of the old Gold Lake building,but Mr. Coughlin would have to again appear before the BAR for movement of the sign. Mr. Coughlin then referred the Board to the computer printout of the proposed sign to be moved which the Board had received. Mr. Coughlin said that Mr. Lieberman, the installer of the first sign, is also present at the meeting this evening should there be any questions. Mr. Jacobson said he gathers the sign would only be raised on the side face and not the front face, whereas at present the signs relate to one another around the corner. Now there will be one sign up and one sign down. After some discussion regarding how the signs are set and the cost involved,Mr. Coughlin stated that after the side sign is moved, if the result is generally viewed as unattractive, relocation of the other sign could be considered. Mr. Immerman agrees with what Mr. Coughlin stated, but raised a question of the addition of the light fixture which the Board was not aware of and does not show on the computer generated drawing. Mr. Coughlin said the light was not included in the computer drawing, because a picture cannot be taken of the light on the wall and put into the computer. He then explained that without the light the sign cannot be seen in the evening, as the area is very dark at night. Board of Architectural Review May 21, 1997 Page 2 Mr. Jacobson clarified the Board's position with respect to lighting signs. Lighting signage is allowed,but each specific application is judged on its own merits. When this submission was reviewed in terms of how the sign will be illuminated, a surface mounted fixture was shown to be as long as the sign, with a couple of fluorescent lamps which light down on the facade of the building. Mr. Jacobson asked Mr. Lieberman if there was anything more that the Board should be aware of. Mr. Lieberman said the sign is color coded to the building. It projects light directly onto the lettering, but not onto the street. Mr. Immerman asked Mr. Lieberman what is meant by the color coded. Mr. Lieberman said the fixture is painted to match the building A discussion ensued regarding security and the lighting used. Mr. Jacobson said security lighting and sign lighting should be separated, and suggested an issue be made with the Town regarding lighting for security reasons by Mr. Coughlin. If not successful with the Town and Mr. Coughlin wants to add lighting to the facade of the building to brighten up the walkway, the Board will entertain that issue. Mr. Jacobson's comments regarding lighting the signage is that lighting the letters could be attractive for the building, but he does not like the proposed technique to be used. Tom Coughlin, the President of The Coughlin Group, addressed the Board. Tom said he used the Bank of New York signage as a sample, at which time a discussion ensued regarding various ways to light a sign without adding hardware to the face of the building. Mr. Jacobson said he is familiar with that signage, and then made reference to the signage on the newly renovated development which will have back lit letters that will glow from behind and stand off the face of the building which is a more attractive technique. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding the signage on the Coughlin building;i.e. the location of the signage on the building (low and high), lighting the signage which will accent the location of the signage, the movement of the letters on the facade and other measures that can be taken. Mr. Jacobson said the Board understands Mr. Coughlin's reluctance to move the second set of letters, which the Board accepts. Lighting the sign and the technique to be used is the issue. The letters were not illuminated before. Mr. Coughlin said the letters were not illuminated before because it was turned down by a previous Board. Mr. Spagnola said the Board is limited in this issue, he is not as adamant against the proposed lighting technique as the chairman, but feels it will not be a benefit to the building to have the other set of letters lower than the lighted sign which will produce an uneven appearance. Ms. Washington suggested accepting the lettering and tabling the lighting issue for further investigation. Mr. Jacobson suggested voting on both issues separately at this time. On a motion made by Mr. Immerman and seconded, the following resolution was ADOPTED: • WHEREAS, John Coughlin has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to relocate an existing sign to a higher elevation at the corner of building located at 178 Myrtle Boulevard, Block 133 Lots 627.1 and 627.2; and Board of Architectural Review May 21, 1997 Page 3 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, John Coughlin 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. Relocate existing side sign to the higher elevation at corner of building as presented. On a motion made by Ms. Washington and seconded, the following resolution was ADOPTED by all members, except Mr. Jacobson who voted against: WHEREAS, John Coughlin has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to light the sign with a light hood, approximately 12 in., at corner of the building located at 178 Myrtle Boulevard, Block 133 Lots 627.1 and 627.2; 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, John Coughlin 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 lighting of the relocated sign at the corner of the building is accepted as submitted. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Carpaneto updated the Board on the status of previous BAR matters as follows; Stop and Shop will appear before the BAR for a sign application;Augie's was summonsed to appear in court on June 15, 1998 for noncompliance for the pole sign. Mr. Carpaneto will contact the Town Board regarding the sign on the side and painting of the facade, and will advise the Town Board that he is in violation. Mr. Spagnola asked about the shopping carts in front of Trader Joe's. Mr. Carpaneto said it was on the building set of plans, but not on the plan the BAR reviewed. He does not feel there is any other place for the shopping carts to be. It is always very neat. Mr. Carpaneto said he can have Trader Joe's reappear before the Board for same. A discussion ensued, with Mr. Spagnola stating he did not want to raise a flag if there is no alternative. Mr. Spagnola asked about the landscaping in the front. Board of Architectural Review May 21, 1997 Page 4 Mr. Carpaneto said he spoke to Mr. Jacobson about that. They called approximately two weeks ago and wanted to change some of the plantings in size because of the shallow depth of soil over rock. There will still be the same number of plants, a few different types, but size was the issue for adaptation. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the BAR will be held on June 18, 1998. ADJOURNMENT Upon a motion duly made Ms. Washington and seconded, the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 8:40 p.m. L7)1 04 , M Marguerite Roma, Necording Secretary