The saga of the George M. Cohan estate has begun a new chapter. Attention has shifted temporarily from the landmarked mansion itself to the six acres that the purchaser, Kiumarz Geula, desires to subdivide into buildable lots. On Jan. 19, the Kings Point board of appeals heard requests for variances from the owner's attorney, Paul Bloom, and also listened to members of the public who supported or rejected the applicant's plans. Chairman Kenneth Olsen and board members Laurie Damast and Mitchell Buchbinder listened intently, asking few questions save one that has been asked often, "Did the buyer know that the house might be landmarked?"

This has been a crucial question. Mr. Bloom's answer has become more streamlined with each Kings Point board that has inquired. "Yes," entoned Mr. Bloom, "he knew there was 'talk' of it, but talk is cheap." Decision-makers in Kings Point have been trying to determine if the buyer innocently stumbled into a hornet's nest and is now burdened with a financial hardship, or if he took a calculated business risk, obtaining the land for a song since its status was up for grabs, and hoped for the best.

The property in question, which is reported to have sold for $5.4 million is a slice of land that runs from the waterfront to Kings Point Road and also includes a non-conforming lot across the street that was the site of the garage structure which was not landmarked. One acre is under water leaving, five acres for development.

Without seeking any variances on lot size, the larger parcel of property could be subdivided into four lots, one containing the landmarked house, leaving three buildable lots. The lot across the street is a non-conforming lot and would need a variance to allow the owner to build a house there.

The attorney for the buyer asked the zoning board to consider granting some variances to allow Mr. Geula to recoup his projected losses that would be engendered in restoring and rehabilitating the Cohan mansion. Mr. Bloom referred to these requests as "tidbits." The more controversial variance request is to increase the size of the house on the lot closest to the water from the allowable 9,350 square feet to 11,000 square feet. Mr. Bloom reasons that since Mr. Geula is prepared to allocate more property for the Cohan mansion than the landmark commission recommended, some concessions should be granted in regard to the floor area ratio (FAR) requirements.

The other major variance request was to make the road, that would be built to service the houses, a private one. A village cul-de-sac would gobble into the area, to be calculated in coming up with the FARs. According to Mr. Bloom, the private road would have an adequate turn-around for emergency vehicles such as fire engines.

Two neighbors spoke in behalf of the plans. One immediate neighbor felt that most of his concerns regarding the plans had been adequately addressed by the owner. John Handler, a landmark commission member, stated that out of respect for the rights of private property owners, he felt it would be important for the zoning board to grant reasonable requests that could help the owner bear the burden of the restoration.

Six attendees spoke against granting some of the variances, specifically the private road and the 11,000 square foot house. David Mack, Kings Point resident and commercial real estate developer, stated unequivocally that the buyer made a business decision, took a calculated risk, went into the deal with his "eyes wide open," and gambled that the property would not be landmarked. Mr. Mack further stated that other potential purchasers walked away from the deal because the landmark issue had not been resolved. After the meeting, Mr. Mack elaborated to the Record that from his experience and knowledge of the area, he predicts that the buyer will make "a windfall" on his investment in spite of the costs of landmarking.

Marvin Rotman commented that the area where the proposed road would be is lined with beautiful trees and an "ancient stone wall," all of which should be maintained.

Leon Korobow, from the Committee to Save the Cohan Property, argued that the "financial burden was of (the owner's) making" and that hardship "cannot be the basis for granting variances." He further stated that the "uncertainty of the land gets built into the price."

Representing the Great Neck Park District, attorney Ivan Klein conveyed that the park commissioners, while not contesting the right of the owner to subdivide the property, do object to the size of the proposed 11,000 square foot house. He argued that it would constitute a substantial change and would be detrimental to neighboring Steppingstone Park, citing a negative visual impact on the park. He added that while Mr. Bloom has asserted that there will be a financial loss, there is no proof of the validity of the premise.

One realtor who requested anonymity said bluntly, "the new owner is crying crocodile tears. He stands to make a killing on the deal if four new homes are built."

Another observer of the proceedings, who also did not wish to be quoted by name, commented, "Remember, when the Cohan property is restored, a selling point that the developer will use is that George M. Cohan lived, wrote music and slept there....."

The hearing on the matter was adjourned and will reconvene on March 9 at 8 p.m. in the Kings Point village hall.