Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - March 3, 2026

Meeting Portal — Tuesday, March 3, 2026

BodyNew Rochelle, New York

SessionMeeting Portal

DateTuesday, March 3, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 1:58:14

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

1:44

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this evening's uh zoning board of appeals meeting.

1:50

My name is Erica Eisner, and I'm the chair of the board.

1:53

Um, just a couple of quick uh notes before we begin.

1:57

Um, for anyone that's new to our meetings, the zoning board of appeals is a quasi-judicial body that's responsible for hearing and deciding applications for variances and appeals of administrative determinations that have made that have been issued by the city in accordance with the city's zoning ordinance.

2:14

Our role and responsibility is to apply the specific facts presented by each applicant, which includes both the submissions which were submitted to the Department of Buildings, as well as the presentation made before us at this hearing, and that would include any voices in support or opposition to an application.

2:34

Um you should all know that we uh have all received submissions and have reviewed them.

2:41

Um in making our determination, we're responsible for plot applying a five-factor test to each application before us, and we are charged with granting the minimum variance that we deem necessary and adequate um in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.

3:02

Tonight's meeting will um the format for tonight's meeting will proceed as follows.

3:07

Uh our clerk will call the role to confirm who is present this evening with respect to each application, both in support and in opposition.

3:15

Then we'll hear each application.

3:18

The applicant will go first and make their presentation, and then the board will have an initial opportunity to ask questions of the applicant.

3:26

I urge anyone who is speaking in opposition to any application to listen to the questions that we ask, and the answer is given because it may in fact answer some of your current concerns or questions.

3:38

We ask that anyone speaking in opposition of any application not repeat what has been said before them.

3:45

Um anybody who's getting up to speak in support or opposition of an application will be limited to three minutes.

3:54

And we do we are pretty strict with that.

3:56

Um we ask that your comments be limited to the specific variants before us.

4:02

There are many issues that are involved in a project going on in the city.

4:06

Not all of them are within our jurisdiction.

4:09

So please limit your comments to the specific application for the variants before us.

4:14

Um at the conclusion of each presentation, the board will vote on whether to approve or reject the application.

4:20

In order for the motion to pass, we must we must have four votes in favor.

4:25

You may notice that we are a little light this evening.

4:28

We are typically a board of seven.

4:30

We only have five members present today.

4:50

Um that is your right, you just need to ask us when you come up to the podium and and we would uh be happy to uh oblige.

4:58

Um I think that's it.

5:00

So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Regina.

5:02

Okay, good evening.

5:04

The first case tonight, this is for roll only.

5:06

Case 28, 2025, 93 Glenwood Avenue.

5:10

The applicant's here.

5:12

Is the applicant here?

5:14

And the opposition of voices to be heard on that.

5:18

Case 7, 2026, 516 Pelham Road, the applicant is here.

5:24

Opposition or voices to be heard on that.

5:28

For the record, I do have a couple of letters that came into the mail as opposition for that.

5:34

Case 38, 2025, 121 Caligny.

5:37

If anyone's here for that, that has been withdrawn, so it won't be heard any longer.

5:41

And case 5, 2026, 120 Buffard has been adjourned until the April 7th meeting.

5:48

New cases this evening.

5:49

Case 8, 2026 for Island View Place, the applicants here.

5:54

Opposition or voices to be heard on that.

5:58

Case 9, 2026, to Larchwood Road, the applicants here.

6:02

Oppositional voices to be heard on that.

6:05

Case 10, 2026, 179 Brookdale Avenue, the applicants here.

6:11

Opposition of voices to be heard.

6:14

Case 11, 2026, 26 Disbrow, the applicants here.

6:19

Oppositional voices to be heard.

6:22

And then we have an administrative item at 99 Wilmot for after the meeting.

6:28

First case tonight, case 28, 2025, 93 Glenwood Avenue.

6:47

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the board.

6:50

My name is Willie Zambrano.

6:53

As you know, uh two months ago we were here and we heard the recommendations from everybody, including the neighbors uh for this project.

7:03

And uh we came back with uh just to highlight some of the improvements that we wanted to do along the driveway, which is seems to be um the case in concern.

7:15

Um so we um provided these renderings uh couple with superimposed uh on um actual picture that we took of the driveway and we created this planter edging that um we were trying to explain by what we're not on the drawings uh back then.

7:36

Um the planters actually work as a um some sort of uh bioretention as well because we're also trying to treat it as a way to divert the water as mentioned two months ago.

7:51

Um as you can imagine, and I I have some other illustrations that would show you that we're at the bottom of this hill uh with a contour levels of two feet intervals.

8:02

Um you can imagine five houses above this area.

8:08

Um it's almost 14 feet up.

8:11

But I'll I'll show you as as I go through the presentation.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████75%

Water And Wastewater Management████████14%

Procedural███5%

Public Engagement█2%

Public Safety█1%

Engineering And Infrastructure█1%

Historic Preservation█1%

Parking Management█1%

Summary of Proceedings

New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - March 3, 2026

The New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) held a meeting on March 3, 2026, at 11:00 AM ET, chaired by Erica Eisner. The board heard seven cases including variances for legalizations, new construction, and one administrative reinstatement. Public comments addressed concerns about flooding, parking, and neighborhood character. The board voted on six cases, approving five with conditions and denying none, with one case adjourned for revised submission.

Public Comments & Testimony

Case 28-2025 (93 Glenwood Ave): Several neighbors spoke. Eric Cruz (42 Vaughn Ave) questioned whether the property is actually a single-family home due to multiple cars and past unpermitted work. Amy Jackson (84 Glenwood) expressed concerns about increased impervious surface and water runoff pushing onto neighbors, as well as utility (garbage cans) pushed to the street. Eileen Remerschmid (45 Vaughn Ave) opposed the proposed wall, stating it would stop water flow onto her property and noted the basement appeared to be occupied by non-relatives. Henriette Moreau (105 Glenwood Ave) supported the application, describing severe flooding at her own property and the applicant’s house, and argued that water management is necessary even if some runoff is diverted to the street.
Case 7-2026 (516 Pelham Road): No public speakers were present; however, the board noted receiving multiple opposition letters.
Case 8-2026 (Island View Place): No public opposition or support was voiced.
Case 9-2026 (2 Larchwood Road): No public speakers; the applicant noted the neighbor agreed to the gravel driveway remaining if not paved.
Case 10-2026 (179 Brookdale Ave): No public opposition. The applicant and architect described severe flooding from storms Ida and subsequent events, with 8 feet of water in the basement, driving the need to move mechanicals and laundry to the first floor.
Case 11-2026 (26 Disbrow Circle): No public comments.

Discussion Items

Case 28-2025 – 93 Glenwood Ave (Sandra Peterson): Applicant Willie Zambrano presented revised plans with planters for stormwater retention, a shed, and removal of parking from the front yard. The only variance before the board was for FAR (0.54 vs. permitted 0.35) to legalize the attic conversion. Board members discussed water diversion, but City Attorney Paul Vaca clarified that drainage issues are addressed at the building permit stage. After an executive session, Chair Eisner confirmed the board’s jurisdiction was limited to the FAR variance. Motion to approve passed 4-1 (Eisner dissenting).
Case 7-2026 – 516 Pelham Road (Owner): Attorney Mark Blanchard and architect Tom Abilama presented a revised plan reducing the number of units from four to three, eliminating two of seven variances. Board members noted the FAR reduction was only 700 square feet (from 7,142 to 6,402 SF) despite removing an entire unit. The board suggested eliminating a parking variance (third outdoor spot) as unnecessary. The applicant requested and received an adjournment to the April 7, 2026 meeting to resubmit corrected plans.
Case 8-2026 – Island View Place (Owner): Architect Mike McCann requested five variances to legalize an existing non-conforming concrete and wood deck. The lot is oddly shaped with a gas station adjacent. The board noted building code requirements for fire rating near property lines. Motion to approve passed unanimously.
Case 9-2026 – 2 Larchwood Road (Ted Ugetta): Architect Gregory Lewis and owner Ted Ugetta sought a variance to legalize a gravel driveway with a zero-foot setback (required 3 feet). The driveway pre-dated the owner’s 19-year tenure. The board added a condition for edging to retain gravel on site. Motion to approve passed unanimously.
Case 10-2026 – 179 Brookdale Ave (Jason Labate): Architect Gregory Lewis and owner Jason Labate requested five variances to convert a small garage to laundry, mudroom, and mechanicals; add two driveway parking spaces; and legalize a pre-existing patio—all due to severe flooding. Board members expressed concern about a new curb cut for a second parking space, but the applicant argued it would not reduce on-street parking. Motion to approve passed unanimously.
Case 11-2026 – 26 Disbrow Circle (Ben Schueb): Architect John Woodruff requested variances for rear yard setbacks to legalize an enclosed screen porch and construct a low deck (3 feet high) with stairs. The deck is placed between an existing porch and garage due to driveway access from the rear. Motion to approve passed unanimously.

Key Outcomes

Case 28-2025 (93 Glenwood Ave): Approved (4-1). Variance for FAR to legalize attic as habitable space. Conditioned on compliance with building code regarding drainage.
Case 7-2026 (516 Pelham Road): Adjourned to April 7, 2026 meeting for revised submission eliminating one parking variance.
Case 8-2026 (Island View Place): Approved unanimously. Five variances to legalize existing non-conforming deck and related setbacks.
Case 9-2026 (2 Larchwood Road): Approved unanimously with condition to install edging to retain gravel driveway on site.
Case 10-2026 (179 Brookdale Ave): Approved unanimously. Five variances for garage conversion, driveway parking, and patios to mitigate flooding.
Case 11-2026 (26 Disbrow Circle): Approved unanimously. Two variances for rear yard setbacks for screen porch and deck.
Administrative Item (99 Wilmot Road): Approved unanimously (5-0). Reinstatement of resolution number 36-22 for 12 months to permit subdivision of vacant lot for single-family dwelling.

Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to this evening's uh zoning board of appeals meeting. My name is Erica Eisner, and I'm the chair of the board. Um, just a couple of quick uh notes before we begin. Um, for anyone that's new to our meetings, the zoning board of appeals is a quasi-judicial body that's responsible for hearing and deciding applications for variances and appeals of administrative determinations that have made that have been issued by the city in accordance with the city's zoning ordinance. Our role and responsibility is to apply the specific facts presented by each applicant, which includes both the submissions which were submitted to the Department of Buildings, as well as the presentation made before us at this hearing, and that would include any voices in support or opposition to an application. Um you should all know that we uh have all received submissions and have reviewed them. Um in making our determination, we're responsible for plot applying a five-factor test to each application before us, and we are charged with granting the minimum variance that we deem necessary and adequate um in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Tonight's meeting will um the format for tonight's meeting will proceed as follows. Uh our clerk will call the role to confirm who is present this evening with respect to each application, both in support and in opposition. Then we'll hear each application. The applicant will go first and make their presentation, and then the board will have an initial opportunity to ask questions of the applicant. I urge anyone who is speaking in opposition to any application to listen to the questions that we ask, and the answer is given because it may in fact answer some of your current concerns or questions. We ask that anyone speaking in opposition of any application not repeat what has been said before them. Um anybody who's getting up to speak in support or opposition of an application will be limited to three minutes. And we do we are pretty strict with that. Um we ask that your comments be limited to the specific variants before us. There are many issues that are involved in a project going on in the city. Not all of them are within our jurisdiction. So please limit your comments to the specific application for the variants before us. Um at the conclusion of each presentation, the board will vote on whether to approve or reject the application. In order for the motion to pass, we must we must have four votes in favor. You may notice that we are a little light this evening. We are typically a board of seven. We only have five members present today. Um that is your right, you just need to ask us when you come up to the podium and and we would uh be happy to uh oblige. Um I think that's it. So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Regina. Okay, good evening. The first case tonight, this is for roll only. Case 28, 2025, 93 Glenwood Avenue. The applicant's here. Is the applicant here? And the opposition of voices to be heard on that. Case 7, 2026, 516 Pelham Road, the applicant is here. Opposition or voices to be heard on that. For the record, I do have a couple of letters that came into the mail as opposition for that. Case 38, 2025, 121 Caligny. If anyone's here for that, that has been withdrawn, so it won't be heard any longer. And case 5, 2026, 120 Buffard has been adjourned until the April 7th meeting. New cases this evening. Case 8, 2026 for Island View Place, the applicants here. Opposition or voices to be heard on that. Case 9, 2026, to Larchwood Road, the applicants here. Oppositional voices to be heard on that. Case 10, 2026, 179 Brookdale Avenue, the applicants here. Opposition of voices to be heard. Case 11, 2026, 26 Disbrow, the applicants here. Oppositional voices to be heard. And then we have an administrative item at 99 Wilmot for after the meeting. First case tonight, case 28, 2025, 93 Glenwood Avenue.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com