Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Small Central Park Avenue cafe seeks one‑space shared‑parking reduction; building inspector conditions noted
Summary
An applicant proposing a 700 sq ft cafe at 742 Central Park Ave asked the Greenburgh Planning Board for a shared‑parking reduction of one space. A one‑day parking survey showed available spaces at observed times; the building inspector recommended approval conditioned on the use remaining retail with no seating, and staff will prepare a SEQR determination and a draft shared‑parking decision for the next meeting.
At its Feb. 19 meeting the Greenburgh Planning Board heard PB2502, a change‑of‑use and shared‑parking reduction request for 742 Central Park Avenue. The applicant proposed converting a former 700‑square‑foot office into a retail cafe (no seating) and asked for a one‑space reduction because the building, constructed in the 1920s, is grandfathered with fewer parking spaces than modern code would require.
The applicant (referred to in the record as Mr. Bridal) presented a parking analysis conducted Feb. 11 with counts taken every two hours from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Staff noted the building has 15 off‑street spaces and eight on‑street spaces near Central Park Avenue (23 total) and that, under the code as applied to today’s uses, the property would require 55 off‑street spaces. The applicant argued differing hours of neighboring businesses mean peak demand would not overlap and that the one additional space needed by the cafe could be accommodated.
Board members questioned the representativeness of a single‑day survey; the applicant said Feb. 11 was a typical weekday and that the site was not subject to special events that day. The building inspector reviewed the shared‑parking reduction request and recommended supporting a one‑space reduction conditioned on the proposed use remaining retail with no indoor or outdoor seating. Staff told the board that should the tenant later add seating, additional approvals would be required.
Members also asked about deliveries (small van before opening), employee count (one employee at a time expected), and ADA accessibility; the applicant said he would add an interior accessible restroom and staff agreed to confirm whether the parking reduction would change ADA parking obligations with the building inspector.
The board directed staff to prepare a SEQR determination and the draft shared‑parking decision for the board’s next meeting on March 5. No final action was taken tonight.
Quote: “We visited the property every 2 hours from 8AM to 8PM to evaluate what type of parking was present on the site,” the applicant said in presenting the survey.
Next steps: staff will confirm ADA/accessible parking implications with the building inspector, prepare SEQR materials, and present a draft shared‑parking decision at the March 5 meeting.
