Fish Requests 98 Year Lease at the Five Corners

After a period of silence from developer Frederick Fish, it appears that the fate of the former home of Bistro Citron at 2-4 Weaver Street is again in play. Recently, large “for rent” signs were posted on the empty façade, renewing the hopes of some residents that the building would again become a restaurant and that plans for a housing development had been shelved.

However, it has now come to light that the Village received a letter from Fish on February 25, 2010 asking for a 49 year lease on the village-owned strip of land that is used as a driveway to the site parking lot, along with a 49 year option to renew the lease. Without use of that land, the developer cannot provide access to the parking lot, and the current lease expires on May 31, 2010.

An April 29th letter from the Heathcote Five Corners Coalition to the Mayor and Trustees notes that the current lease, dated 2005, requires the developer to use the strip of land “in conjunction with the operation by it of a restaurant and cocktail lounge.” Since there is no restaurant or cocktail lounge in operation, the Coalition contends that the 2005 Lease has automatically terminated.

Furthermore, the proposal from Fish asks for permission to use the premises adjoining the Land for “any lawful use ... permitted by Village of Scarsdale zoning code, and not be restricted to restaurant use only” in exchange for agreeing to maintain two exterior facades (the Weaver and Wilmot Road facades) for the term of the lease or “as long as the building can be used in an economic manner.”

However, this implies that if the building cannot be used in an economic matter, the facades could be sacrificed.

In early February, 2010 the trustees voted down the sale of the land to Fish in response to residents who wanted clear restrictions on the use of the property. By proposing a 98-year lease, with no restrictions on the use of the building, this new proposal would bypass the need for a land sale and give Fish freedom to use the building as he chooses.

In closing, the Coalition wrote, “It is not in the best interests of the Village to agree to a new lease that contains terms or conditions any more favorable to the Developer than the terms and conditions contained in the 2005 Lease” and asked the village to keep them apprised of any future developments.

The Trustees Law Committee discussed the proposal in executive session on Monday night May 3rd, but have not made their discussions public.