|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Minutes, Zoning Board of Appeals, January 9, 2007
1
1
2 STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER 3 TOWN OF EASTCHESTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 4
5 MINUTES OF THE 6 EASTCHESTER ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
7
8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X
9 HELD AT: Eastchester Town Hall 40 Mill Road 10 Eastchester, New York 10709 January 9, 2007 7:30 p.m. 11
12 B E F O R E:
13
14 LOUIS SATRIALE, Chairman STEVEN BAKER, Member 15 PAUL CUBITA, Member FRED SALANITRO, Member 16 PETER BORDUCCI, Member
17 P R E S E N T: 18
19 LOUIS REDA, Deputy Town Attorney MARGARET UHLE, Director of Planning 20 JAY KING, Building Inspector
21
22
23 DINA M. MORGAN 24 25 COLONIAL ROAD BRONXVILLE, New York 10708 25 914-469-6353
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
2
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2
3 THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to
4 welcome everybody to the January 9th
5 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
6 Would everybody please stand for the
7 Pledge of Allegiance.
8 (Pledge of Allegiance.)
9 THE CHAIRMAN: The first item of
10 business is to approve the minutes from
11 our November 14th, 2006 meeting. Is
12 there a motion to approve the minutes?
13 MR. CUBITA: So moved.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: Moved by Mr. Cubita.
15 Is there a second?
16 MR. BORDUCCI: Second.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Second by Mr.
18 Borducci. The minutes have been
19 approved. We have an agenda of six items
20 tonight. I'll run through them very
21 quickly to see if the applicant is here
22 or their representative and to have them
23 give an indication whether they're
24 prepared to proceed tonight.
25 The first item under old business
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
3
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2 is Application 05-84, Classic Audi. Mr.
3 Allocco is here and ready to proceed.
4 Second item under old business is
5 06-91 Commerce Bank. Mr. Hocherman is
6 here and read to proceed.
7 Next item and last item under old
8 business is 06-103, 3 Olives Restaurant,
9 and the attorney for the applicant is
10 here and ready to proceed.
11 We have three items under new
12 business. I don't see anybody else in
13 the audience, but my understanding is
14 that all of them will proceed tonight.
15 The first one is 96 Johnson Road, is
16 anybody here?
17 (No comments.)
18 THE CHAIRMAN: No. As I said, I
19 believe from what we've been told by the
20 building department that will proceed
21 tonight.
22 Second application under new
23 business is 06-105, 29 Arlington Road.
24 Nobody is here for the applicant, but we
25 also believe that one will proceed.
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
4
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2 The final one under new business is
3 06-109, 68 Madison Road. Nobody is here
4 for that one either, but we believe it
5 will go forward.
6 That brings us to the first item
7 under old business, which is Application
8 05-84, Classic Audi, located at 541 White
9 Plains Road.
10 MR. ALLOCCO: Good evening. I
11 don't know if you want to give any
12 background for the general public. My
13 understanding is where we were is
14 hopefully for a resolution. When we left
15 off in November, the Zoning Board asked
16 the town to -- I guess the town wished
17 the opportunity to respond to the
18 submissions that were for the November
19 meeting. The town responded. When I
20 received that response, I thought that
21 the easiest thing to do would be to
22 respond orally here rather than submit
23 something in writing and get into a
24 battle of paper.
25 My response is actually going to be
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
5
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2 very brief. I do also understand that
3 the public hearing was left open for that
4 purpose.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: That's correct.
6 MR. ALLOCCO: Basically my
7 presentation has two parts, both very
8 small. I don't see anyone from the
9 public, not to say anybody won't walk in
10 between now and when I finish, and then
11 at that point when you close the public
12 hearing I have basically a summary of our
13 position and at that point I'll be happy
14 to take any questions if there are any.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: That's fine. For
16 anybody that's watching at home, in early
17 December we received a memo from the
18 building department, it's dated December
19 9th, 2006 from Ms. Uhle to the Zoning
20 Board of Appeals. That is the memo to
21 which Mr. Allocco will be responding
22 tonight. As Mr. Allocco indicated, this
23 is a little different than the
24 applications that we hear more normally
25 here in that this is not a request for a
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
6
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2 variance one way or the other, this is
3 actually a preliminary request for an
4 interpretation made by the building
5 department with which the applicant
6 disagrees.
7 MR. ALLOCCO: Thank you. Once
8 again for the record my name is Chris
9 Allocco. My office is at 8 Roy Place in
10 Eastchester. I'm here on behalf of
11 Weinberg Brothers, LLC. Weinberg
12 Brothers is the owner of the property,
13 they're not the occupant. The occupant
14 is more commonly known as Classic Audi.
15 I have Bill Weinberg with me sitting
16 behind me over here. I don't believe
17 there will be any questions for him. He
18 actually got up and said some things at
19 the last meeting in November.
20 I'm here for two purposes. As I
21 said before, one was to briefly reply to
22 the memo received from the town in
23 response to my submission that you have
24 in your package in November.
25 And secondly, which I'll do later
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
7
1 EASTCHESTER ZBA - 1/9/07
2 on, will be just to summarize our
3 position in general so you have the
4 equivalent of a summation. The main
5 reason I didn't go into a long drawn out
6 response to the facts that I received is
7 because it didn't raise, in my opinion,
8 and you may differ, any new legal issues.
9 It basically centered around what I read
10 to be two general themes, the first of
11 which is the town's position is the use
12 that the use variance would absolutely
13 condition upon the paved area remaining
14 as is. And the second part I'll say or
15 the part B I'll say was that the
16 corollary might have been that the town
17 feels the result might have been
18 different had it not -- that the proposed
19 site plan had not been changed midstream
20 in response to both some comments from
21 the public and the board.
22 Basically what we would like to do
23 is take the position that neither are
24 relevant tonight, and there was a good
25 point made in the memo and that is that I
|