By: Karenlyn Barone
The East Rockaway Board of Zoning Appeals, as promised last month, reheard arguments for and against a check-cashing business that was preparing to open in the village before a stop-work order was issued Aug. 14. At the rehearing on Sept. 29, the tenant and his landlord were once again the target of residents- and town officials- wrath and their determination not to let the business open.
The village hall was packed for the rehearing, with residents voicing their displeasure that a permit for such an establishment was ever granted. Their arguments ranged from safety concerns and inadequate parking to property-value issues. The business, slated to open on the corner of Atlantic and Centre avenues, would operate near the Centre Avenue Elementary School and across the street from St. Raymond-s Catholic School and its church.
In February, the East Rockaway Building Department denied a permit for the store, citing insufficient parking, but the principals, Charles Guttilla and Paul Gunder, filed an appeal and had their case heard before the Board of Zoning Appeals in May. There were no residents at that hearing. Residents contend that they were never properly advised that there was a meeting. But with sufficient evidence that there was adequate parking behind the building, the permit was granted to Ballas SIS Properties.
When residents heard that a check-cashing store was slated to open, they rallied, sending petitions to the village and packing every subsequent public meeting with their cry to have the issue reheard. Last month, the BZA agreed.
For the first hour of the meeting, the floor was held by attorney Anthony Sabino, representing the landlord, Lamdros Ballas, and his tenant, Guttillo. He conceded that the landlord marked off what he felt was sufficient parking in the rear lot of the store, only to find that his vision for adequate parking space fell short of village code. Sabino argued, however, that there would be sufficient parking now that a fence had been removed from the property. He presented a posterboard full of photographs of the lot in question, but East Rockaway Village Attorney Anthony Guardino pointed out to him that one of the parking spots he labeled available was, in fact, blocking the back door of a business that had a No Parking sign affixed to it.
Sabino and Guttilla fielded questions from board members, and made their case that $45,000 had already been spent on the proposed business, with another $45,000 in commitments outstanding.
When comments from thepublic were invited, several residents jumped on the issue of safety, citing the absurdness of having an armored car, with armed drivers, stopping in front of a location that is bustling with students at any given time of day. The issue of insufficient parking reigned, as residents pointed out that they already had difficulty parking at the location, without the additional burden of the traffic a check-cashing store was sure to generate, and many comments that this sort of business has no business in East Rockaway were heard once again.
Addressing the board and reading from a prepared statement, Town of Hempstead Councilman Anthony Santino, a longtime East Rockaway resident, said, At the heart of the decision that you are being asked to make is, is this location, at the corner of one of the busiest intersections in our village, an appropriate place to site a high-volume business like a check-cashing store? Santino went on to strongly urge that the application be denied on its merits for lack of off-street parking.
The meeting lasted more than three hours, and at its conclusion, Sabino asked the board for two weeks in which to produce canceled checks for the money already spent on the building. The board agreed. Its next general meeting is scheduled for Nov. 17, but as the Herald went to press, the issue of the controversial business had not been added to the agenda.
Comments about this story?
KBarone@liherald.com or at (516) 569-4000, ext. 202.
