VOM and MBYC Agree to $825K Settlement

The Village of Mamaroneck and the Mamaroneck Beach and Yacht Club have agreed to settle and resolve litigation regarding the club's proposed developments and spanning six years that has cost the village hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees.

The settlement and release documents were approved 3-2 Tuesday night during a highly attended and debated work session. Trustees Toni Pergola Ryan and John Hofstetter cast the dissenting votes.

The parties involved in this agreement are in court today and "there may be additional edits and finalizations" made to the document, according to Village Manager Rich Slingerland. Please check back to view the final version.

As per the 27-page document, which was read by Mayor Norman Rosenblum at the work session, the village agrees to pay the club $825,000 by way of its insurance company to be released from all legal actions the village and the club have been involved in. Any pending actions—the appeal and cross-appeal in regard to the Findings Statement Article 78, the $30 million damages action the club is seeking, the notice of claim against the village to repair docking facilities and conduct electrical work—shall be discontinued "upon payment of the settlement amount and the exchange of the mutual releases." In addition, the tax actions filed by the club will be settled by setting the assessed value of the property for this year at $78,720, with a tax refund of $34,500 for the period 2002-2010.

The club and the village want to resolve the pending actions and tax actions and any related claims, recognizing that "continued litigation will be costly for all concerned and the outcomes of any litigation is uncertain," according to the documents.

The settlement amount, according to the document, must be paid within 15 days after the village issues a Final Amended Site Plan Approval for the club's redevelopment project, and the club agrees not to expand the scope of the application, which includes the construction and modification of cabanas, the marina, seasonal residences and other structures as specified in the site plan.

Such plan will include requests for approval to build "at least" 16 seasonal residential units on the "beach side" of the property, four units inside the clubhouse, and three units on the "Otter Creek side" of the property, among other specifications. The residences can only be occupied by club members or a "successor membership club or guests" between April 1 and Nov. 30 of each calendar year, and may only be leased or rented.

"All seasonal residences not located in the clubhouse shall be no less than 120 feet from any tidal wetlands," according to the document.

The parties agree that such plan is in agreement with the Zoning Code (as it was drafted prior to changes made in 2006), and except for the violations already issued, the village agrees that there are no other outstanding violations with regards to the club's property.

The club is required to submit an Amended Site Plan application and other information for the Planning Board to make a SEQRA determination, and apply for a consistency determination from the CZMC by Sept. 13 of this year.

As per the document, the club must file a building permit application for the seasonal residential units on the beach side of the property. Construction shall be completed within six years after the building permit is issued. This document, however, expressly leaves out the club's application for a perimeter permit, which it was required to get after receiving an emergency structures permit in May. The perimeter permit, if approved, would give the club more flexibility with regards to the dock configuration on its property.

If the village denied approval of the site plan, that would not be considered a violation of the stipulation or the basis to seek an order of contempt, as per the settlement. But the club can annul the stipulation if the Planning Board does not approve the site plan before Nov. 30 or the settlement amount is not paid. This would bring both parties back to where they were before the settlement was reached.

Editor's Note: This is a report on what was read to the public at yesterday's work session. More information, including responses from the parties involved and members of the public, will be added shortly.