Good evening, everyone.

Um welcome to this evening uh meeting of the zoning board of New Rochelle.

Um my name is Erica Eisner, and I'm the chair.

Um this evening we have a relatively short calendar.

Uh just a few opening comments.

The zoning board of appeals is a quasi judicial body responsible for hearing on the site.

Mike.

Oh should I start over?

Just continue.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Erica Aisner, and welcome to this evening's meeting of the New York Shell Zoning Board of Appeals.

Uh we have a relatively short calendar this evening, but just a few opening comments.

Uh applications for variances and appeals of administrative determinations that have been issued by the City of New Rochelle in accordance with our zoning ordinances.

Our role is to apply the law to the specific facts presented to us by each applicant, which includes both the submissions that have been handed up as well as the presentation made today at this hearing, or at any prior hearing if this is an adjourned case.

If any written opposition has been submitted in advance of the meeting or presented orally here, we will consider that as well.

In making our determination, we're responsible for applying a five-factor test to each application before us and to permit only the minimum variants that we deem necessary and adequate and adequate in order to at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.

The format for tonight's meeting will be as follows.

The clerk will call the role to confirm who is present here on each application, both in support and in opposition.

We will then hear each application.

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

At that after that, anyone who wishes to be heard on the application, either in support or in opposition, will have an opportunity to speak.

Your comments will be limited to three minutes.

Um we ask that if there are any subsequent people coming up to speak that you don't restate anything that has already been said.

Um at the conclusion of the presentation and the comments, the vote will approve.

Well, the board will vote to approve or reject the application.

And in order for a motion to pass, the applicant must have four votes in favor.

Um before we move on, I would just like to make a motion to approve the minutes from the May meeting.

Second.

Thank you.

All uh in favor?

Ayes have it.

Okay.

Aye.

Great.

And with anybody opposed?

Okay.

Motion of the meeting or minutes are approved.

Thank you.

So with that, I'll hand it over to Regina to call the roll.

Uh the first case tonight is case 20, 2026, 40 Beach Road.

The applicants here.

Yes.

Just the roll call.

Okay.

Um opposition of voices to be heard on this case.

The new cases are case 23, 2026, 311.

If anybody is here for that case, it has been administratively adjourned because it's going to change.

Uh, just so you know in advance.

Case 24, 2026.

22 Dearborn Street, the applicants here.

Opposition of voices to be heard.

And case 25, 2026, 108 Pengili Drive.

Applicant is here.

Opposition of voices to be heard on that.

Okay, so the first case this evening is case 2020 20-2026.

40 Beach Road.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Jim Fleming.

I'm an architect in Neurochell.

My address is 11 Pratt Street.

I'm a resident of New Rochelle.

Uh with me tonight are Devin and Jason Hammonds, the owners of the House.

Uh we were here last month.

Um and uh presented our uh proposal for an addition of a garage and a suite upstairs of the garage uh on the house.

Um describe the conditions as they are.

It's a corner lot, uh, just to really quickly reiterate it comes down Beach Avenue, the long lots, corner lot 40 beach, and then it turns on to Springdale, and then lots going in it in a normal uh lot proportion perpendicular to the ones on beach.

Uh that usually on corner lot that usually burdens the corner, although uh a lot of times it benefits it, but sometimes when an existing house is on the lot already, and it is a long lot.

Although a lot of times it benefits it, but sometimes when an existing house is on the lot already, and it is a long lot.

You're burdened with the two front yards.

The choice is where do you put the backyard?

And in most cases, you have a choice of where to go.

So one of the things is we'd like to remove the existing garage.

It's a little small, unusable.

You can barely get a normal SUV in there.

And then move the driveway over, put a modest garage underneath, and then they have their elderly mother living with them, which they're trying to create a room over the garage attached to the second floor, and a stairway down to the first mudroom.

Above that we proposed coming over to on an angled inner lot line against the neighbor at 27 Springdale.

And then it fades out toward uh towards Springdale itself and gets wider.

Not by much, but it does improve as it comes down to Springdale.

At the last meeting, I described how on this particular lot if you pick either choice or the side yard in the back or the front.

If you if you do choose the uh side yard to do this against the neighbor's lot on the west, 27 Springdale, uh you could go up to eight feet, but you still need a variance because the rear yard would now be in the extreme corner of the of the corner lot.

So it's almost the same variance no matter which way you do an addition in this square corner.

So we figured let's let's keep the open yard as much as we can on one side, get rid of the garage, and move the garage in.

It improves everything really on the on the site.

Uh and from the last meeting, uh we heard what the neighbor said.

Okay, well, you know, we can move it around a little bit.

So uh you'll see on on this, is it showing there?

Yeah.

You'll see on the site plan, but mostly on the um the the next plan of the building.

We've moved the addition and garage in six feet, creating a wider view corridor from their house, uh, which was one of their main complaints about the addition, and then squeeze the building in two feet, so it's two feet thinner.

So we did uh make an attempt at accommodation six feet in, moving it away from Springdale, and then squeezing the building two feet over.

And in that case, we asked for a 12-foot variance, uh, lessening the um not by much but some uh to make it possible uh by the two feet.

So we've tried to improve each case.

Um now uh it's interesting before you you try to you try to use factors for um mitigation.

We can't make the garage too small, but we've made it as small as possible to be usable.

Uh and I that was uh kind of an interesting discussion with the building department reviewer uh where I tried to take advantage of the FAR exemption, but I was taking too much out originally.

We're still okay.

But uh she said you got to make the garage uh usable for only one car.

Fine, we can do that.

That's where the two feet was we were able to accommodate the the structure.

So other rippling inward things like that help the project and help us uh mitigate the uh approach on side yards.

But I think one of the most important things to notice is that as per the last meeting, the um side yard again is proposed to be 12 feet, where eight feet, if it was the side yard would be permitted.

Say if this was an interior lot, they'd be allowed to build up to eight feet, and that goes back in in my presentation of the variance is no matter where you put the rear yard, it's still gonna be about the same.

So we decided to stick with the 12 feet and uh encroach on the 30 feet and then keep the backyard open as much as possible against the other neighbor, but it's there already, so uh you really wouldn't add to this house in that direction.

Um so that's that's basically it.

One of the uh can I do this here?

The one on the screen now is is with the uh garage and suite, move back six feet.

You'll see the straight line against the porch, which I thought was a nicer feature actually than the original presentation.

Uh and then uh one of the members had asked for a section showing the uh the grade and uh where the uh neighborhouse is and where this uh addition would be relatively uh accurate presenting where uh the second floor there, their first floor uh is actually where the window is that that they look at.

Uh that actually comes in at a half story above their second floor.

So there is still a lot of room.

So the section I think is very important to see, and I hope this shows what the question was.

Um there isn't too much difference in uh the uh actual usable usability of the project itself.

But we have accommodated uh distance, uh a little bit of size of the building, and uh a little bit of openness on the yard still where they want to look out of view corridor.

Uh that's that's pretty much how I would explain what we have going here.

Uh that's the topography.

That's looking up Springdale, and that's the uh Hammond's car uh in front of the small garage.

I think we went through this the last time.

That's the uh you look behind the I believe it's a magnolia, you look behind that, that's the neighbor's house with the window.

That's the small garage right there to the left.

There's looking up the rocks from the neighbor.

Uh and we have uh comments on the rocks too.

This is a good picture showing the the same section uh in actual photographing right there.

27 to the left, 40 beach to the right, and that is the end of the uh the graphics.

Uh with that from uh described.

May I turn it over to the board?

Sure.

Uh Erica, you want to hear the opposition first?

Uh does it well or does the board.

Does anybody want to ask any questions first?

No.

Okay.

Then, yeah, sure.

We'll hear from the opposition.

So have a seat, Jim.

We're gonna have the opposition come up.

State your name and adjust for the record.

Good evening, madam chair and members of the zoning board and staff.

My name is Greg Varian of the Variant Law Firm with an office in Nurshell.

I speak tonight on behalf of Hillary and Jake J, residing at 27 Springdale Road, which borders the applicant's premises at 40 Beach Road.

Two submissions have been made by my clients in opposition to the adjoining neighbors' original and revised application.

These two submissions include Hillary J's remarks at last month's hearing and illustrations, additional illustrations in support of our opposition.

The applicant is proposing a very large addition to an already large house.

According to city records, the original house described by Jim last month as a cottage, was built in 1910, expanded twice in 1928 and 2008 to its current large size, which includes five bedrooms.

With the new two-story addition, existing rooms on both floors will be expanded.

A new two-car garage will be added with stairs and an elevator to access the very large new space above the garage, labeled sitting suite.

Adjoining this large sitting suite is a suite bathroom.

No mention is made of a bedroom.

So are we to believe the purpose of the second floor portion over the garage is to provide access to the second floor for sitting.

Applications require this require this variance because this proposed addition extends into the required rear yard setback by 16 feet, 18 feet from the client's home.

Substantial, a 66% deviation from the 30-foot setback the law requires.

The revised plan reduces the length by two feet, a 60 percent deviation.

Courts have held that such high deviations are substantial and cause for a denial.

If this substantial variance were to be granted, the Jay's house situated on a narrow parcel, similar to all the other lots fronting Springdale, would be negatively impacted.

Hillary and Jake J purchased their home in North Shell a little over a year ago.

Their broker, Arlene Gibbs of Sotheby's, states that although the House presents some challenges with a shared driveway and a steep incline, the beautiful setting with lush I lost my place.

Foliage and unique privacy on one side of the house, the side two feet from the applicant's property, sealed the deal.

She goes on to opine that such a massive structure abutting the Jays home would not only take away from my clients' quality of life, but would cause their property to lose significant resale value.

Zoning law is meant to protect property owners.

Property owners rely on the law to protect them against exactly what is being proposed tonight.

Applicant has failed to offer credible justification for this massive two-story addition.

This is not uh variance that is the smallest variance.

It's varying the law is the exception, and the applicant has not met its burden.

Therefore, we request that you deny the application.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other opposition.

Or to talk for it, you can talk for it or against it, whatever you wish.

Just state your name and address for the record, please.

Good evening, neighbors.

My name is James Sullivan.

I'm at 60 Linwood Road in Newark, New York.

In five weeks, I'll be living in a house for 30 years.

As we all know when we are buying houses, we look at comps, we look at you know, comparables and what the school system's like and everything along those lines.

The Hammonds were kind enough to share uh the plans with me.

I think that the proposal fits the tenor of the neighborhood.

But what's more important to me is the tenor of the neighbors.

The Hammonds have been terrific neighbors.

They make their house a welcoming place.

They have uh a cookie, uh a chili cook-off every year, and they invite the whole neighborhood to it with games for the kids, jumping castle, uh, and the like, and it's just a wonderful thing to have people like that in your neighborhood, and that's something that you can't put a price on when you look at your real estate.

So I wanted to come tonight to speak in favor of this addition, because I would like to keep uh the spirit of our neighborhood alive.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you for your service.

Anybody else like to come up?

Good evening, Madam Chair and the board.

Hello, hello, good evening.

My name is Jason Hammonds, um, one of the owner um owner of Forty Beach.

And Devin Hammonds.

Um, the top line here is that just cutting to the chase of like understanding what we're here for today.

I believe that this application does not create a new um neighborhood burden, it improves a pre-existing non-conforming condition by removing and pulling back an existing garage at the property line and reducing the impact against 27 Springdale and creating a more code conscious and better planned side condition that it was then and exists today.

Um big thing that we love to bring up is as you start to look at an overview that I do I submit this or pass this to the yeah.

Yeah, you can submit it to me.

Uh and just oh, don't speak until you get to the microphone.

In looking at the side yard and the proposed spacing is not out of character for Larch Montan Woods.

Um, for the new Rochelle um R1 7.5 code, allowing the houses to be 16 16 feet apart and meeting the eight-foot uh foot side yard, based on the overview, you can see that the majority of the homes in Larchmont very due live in that very tight line.

So we feel that as we look to having this extent this addition put on, we are not coming out of the norm or out of the context of like how uh out of the neighborhood.

Um the and then can I just stop you there?

I just have a question about what you just said.

So what I'm what we're looking at here is an overview, but how do I know which lots in this picture um are the ones you're referring to?

You're you're saying that many of these homes have the same uh encroach into the setbacks in the same manner that you're requesting a variance for, but I don't I can't tell that from this picture.

That's a good point.

Um I can clearly I can go into more detail and like have a list and update it with the list and of the of the addresses.

That would that would be helpful.

That's great.

Uh also speaking to just like the CMA and the comparative market analysis year over year.

Um, in the last year and a half, it's been it's a 9.6 uh increase above the actual asking price for homes.

So, and that goes with 27 Springdale as well.

So, over the course of these years, we can see that the market value does hold and does and and does hold value when it comes to Larchmont Woods.

Uh I can send this to you guys also.

And then I was just gonna say one more thing about the addition, the room above.

I'm sorry, could you state your name for the record?

I'm Devin Hammonds, also a resident of 40 Beach.

The room above the garage is to take care of my elderly mother.

Um we lost my father a few years ago, and she's in our care, and we the rooms that we have in our house are quite small, and so we wanted to be able to have a room that she could access accessibly in a wheelchair.

We're putting in a lift that would be ADA, that's why there is a sitting room division.

It wouldn't be two different rooms in that room.

It's just an area for her to get around the bed and be able to have a wheelchair accessible bathroom if she were to need it.

And that's something that we can delineate and add on to the existing plans to make sure that's clear based on one of the opposition's points.

Uh I think in closing, we're not asking for the maximum possible build.

We're still at 32% when it comes to the size.

And then also the uh there's I lost my pardon.

I lost the points.

Um we re we revise the plan, reduce the impact, and are asking for the minimum relief needed to improve a difficult pre-existing condition while preserving the neighborhood's character.

That's all she's got.

Okay.

Thanks.

Uh anybody else like to come up?

Just myself.

Uh I do have a question.

Wait, there's another person, Jane.

Okay, sorry.

Fernando, you want to ask a question?

Yeah.

Of which one?

Oh.

Oh.

I I do want to butt in for a moment, Madam Chair.

Um, before we continue, I wanted to disclose that um, for the record that I know members of the opposition socially, our relationship is purely social, and I do not believe it affects my ability to consider this application fairly or and impartially based solely on the evidence presented.

Thank you.

Hi board.

Um my name is Jacob Yanoviak.

I live at 27 Springdale Road uh with my wife Hilary.

Um I just wanted to briefly sound off because everybody's taking a turn to talk tonight.

Uh just with some inconsistencies in this process that we've experienced.

Um at our last meeting, I think our neighbors who we get along with great outside of this.

This is uh a one-off in our relationship with them.

We get along great.

I think they would say the same.

We just have friction over this one issue.

Uh at the last meeting, our opposition caught them off guard.

They asked to speak in the hallway to address the issues that we had.

The conversation we had in the hallway was promising.

We talked about a one-story garage addition, which would not infringe upon our light space and air of the house that we've recently purchased.

Uh that conversation seemingly went in one ear and went out the other, like a draft of a plan on uh on the paper they had does not resemble the plan today, which is the same structure shifted over two feet.

To me, it does not make a meaningful difference, and my opposition remains the same.

Um the other argument here about an eight-foot uh space between side lots.

That's the great thing about this situation.

It's a corner lot, and it was always a corner lot.

It's irrelevant to bring up uh side lot zoning.

And given that their house protrudes further towards Springdale than ours.

If these houses were laid out at the same time as side lot houses, they would have been in plain, and we would not be hedged in having the front of our house shadowed by the back of their house, right?

Side lots have maybe less space on the side, but they have a clear view out the front of their house and out of the back.

There are plenty of other options to meet the needs that have been presented here.

A first floor uh bedroom is common and is practical with elderly relatives.

It eliminates the expense of engineering an elevator install and creating movement within the house and adding more volume to a house which has been expanded and added to many times already.

When it was built, it was in fitting with the character of the neighborhood.

As it is proposed, it would be a behemoth.

And if you look around the neighborhood, you'll see that most of the houses are not like that.

There may be one or two anomalies, and there's a graph, there's a chart rather that my wife uh provided you with that shows how much of an outlier this house is.

Even as it stands below the square footage coverage of the lot, it is still a beast of a house that is being proposed.

Um so that's all I have to say.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Anyone else in the audience want to speak?

I think that um Fernando had some questions.

Yes, um, just for the benefit, I wasn't here at the last meeting, and I have the information.

Show me a little haste as to you know why was it that was promised to discuss uh the last meeting and what is the actual change that you made?

Because to me, this this sounds you know, visiting looking at numbers, still looks like a very big house.

And then you know, I'm hearing that some changes were gonna be made, but I'm still having a hard time having a differentiated how drastically or what was reduced to accommodate some of those changes to make it a little more easy to to kind of have a judgment on.

Everybody said that's for you, Jim.

Yes, thank you.

Um, to uh answer your first question.

Uh the um the change we made from the last meeting was to take our proposed addition and push it back on the site six feet from where it was originally placed, away from Springdale, and also shave off two feet from the 27th Springdale side, which pushes it in.

I had to redesign the floor plan, which I've shown on the on the screen here.

Uh did if I can just jump in.

Did that reduce the square footage, or did you just relocate the slightly?

Just slightly what is slightly.

Um the the garage and the stairway in the back of it are 30 feet, 31 feet long by two.

So that's 60 feet.

Uh okay, thank you.

Which is uh it's also uh everybody's saying how big a house it is, it's not a big house at all.

The the bedrooms for the kids are about 10 by 10, maybe 10 by 12.

They're pretty small.

Uh the house itself is 26 feet wide.

That's not wide at all.

Uh and and I do um kind of uh object to the implication that wording on the floor plan is meant to be some kind of deceit.

It's not.

We use a city room, we use bedroom.

We're I'm working with them, we know what it is.

Uh uh the building department can determine, which we've put on the plans, what a bedroom is and what the light and ventilation uh equal, which is complied with.

But also, I just want to say something.

I've worked on a lot of houses in the woods, as they call it, woods of Larchmont.

Bends into uh Neur Shell.

Uh most of the cottages, and I repeat this is a cottage originally because these were hunting cottages back in 1910.

There were no houses around except for the ones on the corner.

I can name the one one on the corner of Woods Way, I can name one down on Weaver Street in the town, but still cottages they were built.

Uh the additions to this house uh had to be very well matched, or they're just simply a porch on the back and a vestibule and a mud room accommodating modern life.

Uh I truly believe as an architect, um a preservationist as well.

Uh this is a cottage.

I'd call it a cottage.

Uh uh even again.

So I just want to make sure that the board knows that there's a legitimate uh offer of what this house originally was.

Uh basically, uh have I answered your questions at all?

Yeah, I think you know from the reduction of MPC and Wolverine.

Yes, it was shrunk.

And and and also um just for enlightenment, I guess I the um one of the members had requested a site section just to show the relationship of the massing, and we've provided that.

Uh so whether the the yard is on the side or the back, as I said several times and in the last meeting, uh it's almost the same variance either way because the backyard created is a square.

If you pick the backyard toward the inside corner, you still need a variance to come forward and build on the house.

The the 30 feet goes right through the back of the house.

If you if you flip that and make the side yard in the rear, you maintain the rear yard, but you ask for a variance for the side.

And the the character in the neighborhood does have houses eight feet, and in some cases close, as as uh maps will show.

But we're at 12 feet, and that and that increases as you come toward uh Springdale, pardon me.

Uh and uh one of the uh items uh I believe you asked was the um uh size and use.

Um we can't make it smaller to make it a garage.

Uh and uh you also asked about the the uh discussion.

I was part of that discussion, most of it.

It was only uh ideas being tossed about.

There was no agreement, there was no uh I don't recall a sketch, and if it was I would have made it.

And um there was no agreement to what to do.

We were always gonna do a two-story house addition.

Uh and uh after many discussions after the meeting and days after that, we discussed many options.

And I said, let's move it back and shrink it a little bit.

But the biggest thing I think, as you see on the corner drawing there, we we've increased the uh view corridor that was so uh graphically presented the last time.

We've increased that also.

And it's it's not a uh code um it's not a code qualification, it's just something we did to make the view corridor from the one window a little better.

Uh I just wanted to come back with some of those items as the opposition had uh mentioned a few things.

Thank you.

So it's a single car.

Jim.

Yeah, no, they know.

The owner just wanted me to emphasize that it's a single car garage.

And uh as I said in the presentation, uh that was conveyed to me uh during the uh FAR discussions with the building department.

Uh and uh and exceptions to that.

It is a single car garage, and uh you can actually open the doors on your SUV in there now.

Jim, question for you.

Um a couple questions actually, just to reestablish it.

So Beach Road is the front yard.

Or is the side yard?

It's the actual ent front entry to the house.

Right.

But we're calling Springdale zoning-wise the front yard.

We're using uh see that's the thing, you have a choice.

I know, right.

So what what do you what have you selected here again?

I'm just confused with your chart.

The inside lot line against 27 as the rear yard lot line.

So the 10-foot variance for the rear yard is the back of the stairwell to the rear property line, basically.

Yes, it's 12 feet now, but it yes.

Into the rocks.

The 10-foot setback from the rear of the stair to the property line is what, a side yard.

Oh, to the to the back of the the long side of yes, yeah.

That's the side that's the that's the side yard.

That's a side yard.

Okay.

We're not changing anything on that.

Gotcha.

That complies.

Yeah.

By a great deal.

Right.

Ten feet.

So it's 12 feet now that the there's the variance you're seeking.

Right.

We that's what the rear yards from the original notification.

Right.

Well, it's changed it to 12.

Changed to 12, but also something we did with the front push.

I'm sorry, it was it was changed to 10.

So it was 12.

He reduced it to 10.

Okay.

That's right.

From 30.

So it's from 30.

No, it's it's it should it it's requirements.

10 where minimum required is 30.

Yes.

Yes.

And we've redrawn it to be 12 for this presentation.

It's 12.

But the but the denial says 10.

As does the agenda.

Right.

I don't know what that is.

The plan I've submitted says 12.

Right.

Can you show me where on the plan?

That's why you got confused with those numbers.

I'm sorry.

We have some conflicting information.

So can you can you point out to me in your submission where we see the 12 feet?

Okay.

It uh it went off here.

Let me find it here.

Which of the 11 pages?

Which page should I be looking at?

To A1, the first one.

A1.

A1 or SP1.

Well, SP1.

Um I have to apologize to the board.

It is 12.

It was 10, and now it's 12.

That is my fault.

I typed it wrong.

Okay.

Sorry, I uh don't look where to put it in.

SP1?

SP1, yeah, with the side.

I'd like to make a comment or two, please, if I may.

Um I've heard uh all the comments uh this evening, as well as those from last time.

Where is that?

Um I don't want to put any words in your mouth, Mr.

Yanoviak, that I didn't hear.

Um but garage size and setback size all are disturbing.

But is it correct to say that the greatest um offense to you is the height or the existence of the second story?

Yes.

Okay.

I'm sorry, Colin.

Can't have a conversation with your neighbor unless they're at the Okay, please.

Yes.

Just want to stay for a minute in case you have something else.

Well, that was that was going to be my question to uh to the architect or or Okay.

Is did you make any effort to uh mitigate the height?

Uh because I understood the same thing.

The uh the greatest offense to the neighbors is the height of the addition that is uh you know blocking their uh the view in the air of their property.

And my question is to you is did you did you go back and try to mitigate the height?

I I I understand you you uh you moved the uh you know the setbacks, but uh the real issue uh from the opposition is is is the height of the uh addition.

Is that uh no, we didn't, and we didn't uh discuss a it might have been discussed on their part, but it wasn't a central part of the uh of the discussion on the way out.

Extremely informal.

No, I don't think that's the question.

Not about the I'm coming to it.

Okay.

Uh no, we didn't lower the height because we we're trying to match as you said, it's an elderly uh parent who's in the we're trying to come off the existing second floor directly over to the second floor in the garage.

The difference between the first floor and the adjacent grade where we're proposing the build is is three risers, two feet.

So it's only it's two feet more than um we if we were building on grade and up.

So there wouldn't be that substantial difference between any roof height.

Uh the only thing uh I I remember thinking of doing was uh cutting the gables back so it's a quadruple hipped roof, uh which would cut the front off.

An old old trick for architecture, you cut the the high gable off.

And you know, they don't want to do that because it looks like the cottage this way.

It's a bit better piece of architecture if you look at it that way.

Um I mean we can consider it, but we don't uh we weren't gonna cut it down or do a one-story structure that was not in the uh in the offing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is that sorry, another question?

Um is that parking space in the garage currently required by zoning?

You don't need a garage, but you have to have off-street parking.

You have to have off-street parking for your for your vehicles.

And they have it now.

They also use the driveway.

But this actually pulls the car in further, and and it you can go into it and park it in there.

But yes, you do need parking, but you don't need an enclosed garage.

And is there enough room in the uh driveway or in front of this edition to park a car and fulfill any zoning or code requirements?

You know, I I don't have the code in front of me.

I know in the next town, you could park in the driveway right up to the curve.

Mr.

Backer might be able to answer.

Yeah.

No, wait.

Mr.

Vaca.

You can only park in front of a garage in a required front yard.

You cannot park unless you're outside the required front yard.

You can have a parking space outside the required front yard that is not contiguous to a garage.

If there is no garage, you have to be outside the required front yard.

Thank you, sir.

That answers my question.

Which which can mean inside your front yard.

Um yes, I forgot that.

Yeah, you have to have a garage at the end of your driveway to park in it.

Because it looks like it can just continue to it.

That's that's it.

Jim, I think um I think it's a great design, as always.

Um compliment you on that.

And um I don't necessarily see a problem with the encroachment on the neighbor, given the I'm assuming that that section is correct.

Um and I know it's a difficult site being on the corner lot, unfortunately.

Um unfortunately the Springdale Road is not the front of the house, because I think it would have worked out better for you.

Um but I just uh, you know, as our chair mentioned to start off with, we have to uh grant uh the minimal variance this year, and I think that um um you know a 12-foot variance for a 30-foot required rear yard in this case is uh is pretty substantial.

Um I don't know what else could be done to uh to mitigate that.

I know you've you've tried your best on this.

Um but anyway.

That in itself is part of part of the uh five test.

What uh Mr.

Stanziel just described to me says that's exactly why we're here.

There is not another possibility to do it unless we put something crazy on the house.

Well, there is, but the other option is you don't have to do it.

You know, yes, of course.

Right.

Um they're trying to improve their house, that's all I could say.

Uh something would be built there in some version.

Um if they flip, but you still need a variance as I've described several times because of the corner condition of the lot and the front yards.

Uh uh yes, it's substantial in terms of number, but like I keep trying to uh make a point of if it was a inline inner lot, they wouldn't have this problem.

And everybody else has a very deep lot they could actually double the size of their house on the other lots around it.

So these guys are the burdened ones.

And uh no matter what we do, we'd always be asking for a similar addition.

I mean, a similar variance for an addition.

Um got a park car.

Uh they like another room.

Uh and uh there's a lot of houses on it that are pretty big around it.

Right across the street is a huge house.

I I think that's one of the things that I'm struggling with a bit here.

The only information that I'm being presented with that compares what you want to do on this lot versus what's going on in the neighborhood is the chart that um we've been provided by the opposition.

And that chart says to me that this is for almost a 42 percent ratio where nothing else comes close to that.

And um I I don't maybe you can speak to me sp about why this isn't applicable or how this lot and your proposed project um is not unique to this neighborhood and other lots around it, but I have an aerial picture that doesn't show me what's going on specifically in any of the neighboring lots.

I don't have any other comparisons from you, and the comparisons I do have show this to be a vastly um different proposal um taking a house that's 2900 square feet up to 4700 square feet um with a 42 percent ratio.

Uh I don't think that that number you're reading is correct for the size of the house.

I I can't hear you, I'm saying.

I'm just uh talking talking to my my owner here.

Uh the house size uh is not uh 57 47.

Uh I have to say that the basement is basically buried.

There's only a few windows showing at the front corner for the basement.

Uh about a third of that basement is uh uh filled concrete, which just they throw lawn chairs and stuff in there, and that's the back toward where we're building.

Uh and then um when I think of the size of this house, you know, I I could say, hey, you know, the that guy's that guy's my size, I'd like a jacket like that.

Can I can I get that jacket too?

Um my own house.

It's 24 feet wide and 34 feet deep.

This house is only 24 feet more longer than that.

It's it's not a it's not a big house, and it's built in a way that makes it look long and big.

Uh the most of the additionals we're doing too are very nice porch, and we just want one more room and a garage, which we're taking away.

And it just so happens to be that we chose to make the variance that way.

It uh it's the board's discretion on whether the five questions are met.

You know, it doesn't cause an environmental problem.

It's uh uh there aren't we looked at it several times.

We found that this was the best solution for the problem.

Uh then there's the um is it a detriment in the neighborhood?

Yes, somebody who doesn't like it is gonna say no, I don't like that.

But we don't think it's not in character with the uh new shell and with the area.

But I think that's the that's what I'm struggling with.

I don't have that information from you.

I don't I can't the information that I'm presented with tells me that it's not in character with the neighborhood, and I don't have anything from you stating otherwise.

May I bring something up to you right now?

Uh y yes, although it's hard for us to evaluate stuff that's handed up.

I mean look, it's uh it's it's it's your right, I believe, if you want to go back and present us with some other or different information.

It's your right if you want to go forward with a with a motion.

I'm happy to look at what you want to pass up.

I'm just that's what I'm struggling with.

Um the information that I have from the opposition is not countered by anything you're giving us.

Yeah, yes, map.

Wait, wait, you have to speak over there, sorry.

Everything is recorded.

Yeah.

Uh uh what you're looking at there is a Westchester uh GIS map of this area of the in question on the and I've circled actually I think the circle was for the uh notification radius.

You see, right across the street is a very big house.

Our house is the one with the 40 on it on it.

And you see that the other houses are spaced very regularly.

Uh so you got to regard something in terms of front yards and side yards.

Uh and um there you can see the yards are the yards are big, the houses vary in size all over the place.

But right across the street, there's a huge house.

Yeah, that's not really problem.

I don't Jim the G, I had these maps you know are not really notoriously.

But um but thank you.

Okay.

Does anyone else have any other questions for the applicant?

Okay.

So Jim, what do you want to do?

You want to adjourn or do you want to vote?

Yeah, some more uh having discussed uh what we would do, uh the owner would choose to adjourn to the next meeting.

And remember what the remarks the board said to give.

The request is granted.

Right.

Okay.

All right, great.

Thank you.

We'll see you in the next meeting.

There was no August meeting, so it'll be September.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next case tonight is case 24, 2026, 22 Dearborn Street.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is John Woodruff, the architect with offices at 12 Moran Place in New Rochelle.

And I'm here tonight representing the Chishmars who aren't here with us.

They're living in California right now, and uh we're renovating their home.

And I'm here with Scott Humphreys, who's our contractor.

And um we have a building permit, and we're doing uh kitchen and baths in the house, and um we need a few variances to go along with our uh application for their renovation.

Um we're requesting area variances to permit the construction of a new garage uh on the property.

We're going to enlarge the existing 12 by 18 one-car garage uh to a 20 by 20 garage so we can fit two cars.

The garage is severely dilapidated.

It was built in uh boy, 105 years old, so it's in really bad shape.

In fact, we wanted to repair it, but we couldn't.

So we are proposing uh a new garage, uh basically in the same location.

If you look here, we're we're keeping the same side yard, we're keeping the same setback, and that's two of the variances we need, even though we're keeping the same dimensions.

Um we have three variances for the garage, the side yards, and then we have a percentage of the house footprint, which um is is large, and that's a significant variance.

It's about 12% over what's required.

Um, but those are the three variances we need for the garage.

The house itself, we have a stair where we um reconfigured the kitchen and the breakfast room, and we decided a stair in this location would work best down to the existing patio.

The house itself is only three feet off the property line, so we're putting a stair there.

Um when the house was built in 1905, um the setbacks were different than they are today of six feet.

So um we aren't changing the house, of course, but we are asking for a variance for that stair.

The the interesting thing about the garage, and I I think this is why it's it it the variance should be granted, is that the house uh has two different um fronts.

So it fronts on Dearborn Street, um which is a hilly street, and the parking is tough there.

So um you're always kind of you can't always get a parking space.

So the idea was this topography drops a lot, and you can see I drew a section here through the house.

So here's Dearborn Street, and there's a little person in a car here, and then the site slopes all the way down to Halligan Street, which is a street that um is a very small street, and it's right where Halligan Hall is from Holy Name.

And um, I felt that the garage is on its own, almost on its own little parcel down there.

And the idea was to put a two-car garage there, uh, get rid of the old dilapidated one, and then it would have plenty of uh nice access down here and would not be um too obtrusive on the property.

Here's a shot of the back of the house.

We plan to bring the stair out here and come down to the existing patio.

Um here's another shot from the back of the house where you can see it slides, it slopes down a lot.

So up here will be our patio.

We'll come out of the door here, and then we'll maintain the existing steps that come down to the lower garage, and then this guy will tear down.

And um, this is a side view.

You can see where the garage will be, and then here's Halligan Hall here from Holy Name.

And here's our very poorly leaning garage.

Um that we hope to tear down and enlarge.

What else can I just uh explain to me the existing garage is non-conforming?

What is the difference between what we have today versus what we'll have with the new proposed garage?

Um it'll be a two-car garage, the new one.

Right now it's 12 by 18 and and uh very small.

So I just I just found the picture that I was looking for.

I apologize.

It's okay.

So the idea is to get them a new modern garage, which isn't in bad shape.

Um, and it's a scary garage right now that's very old and and in bad shape.

So that's the um the proposal tonight.

Um I do have Scott here if you have any questions from the Mr.

Woodruff, could you scroll back to that picture for a second?

The picture of the garage.

Yes, please.

Got a little rack to it, does it?

Yes.

Thank you.

Little rack, yeah, it's leaning.

Leaning left.

Rack so I just I just wanted to make sure I understand.

So the side the side, the 2.8 is 2.8 now and is going to be 2.8.

Correct.

The um That's right here.

What how is it it how is it changing the variance that you need from what exists there today?

Maybe I'm not saying that very artfully.

What happens is really the 2.8 is no longer allowed.

It's really supposed to be six.

Right, I understand that.

But compare you're putting back what's already there, but you're making it wider in a direction that you can go in.

So that's what I'm just trying to understand.

If you were replacing exactly what's there with the same size, you'd need the exact same variances on the garage, correct?

No.

That's what I want to say.

If you replace the garage in its exact dimensions, length, width, and height.

No, I understand that.

I was just trying to understand if the variances are getting are getting worse.

If the if the encroachments are getting worse by the fact that you're putting in a larger garage, and it doesn't seem to me that they are, because the expansion is going to be to the left, which is where you have plenty of space to go.

Exactly.

But thank you.

You're not worsening the encroachment.

No, but what it is we never had the the other variance, which is the percentage of the footprint of the house.

That's about 10 or 15 years old.

So that's something that we're okay.

I understand.

Thank you.

Just wanted to make sure.

Does anyone have any questions?

Is there any opposition or anyone that would like to speak on this case?

Does anyone have any comments, questions?

So do me a favor.

I'm just trying to read through this.

Summarize the actual barrishes you're asking me, because I'm looking at all these numbers and it's getting all muddy.

So if you just give me a ABCs of the barrences you are asking and what they are and what you know you requested for.

I also have a list.

I didn't have time to put it in my um presentation of adjacent homes that have one and two car garages and some pictures.

So I need four variances.

Three for the garage and one for the house.

The one for the house is for a stair on the side of the house that will not go farther than the house is now.

It'll be adjacent to the house, so it's not encroaching on the house.

But I'm three feet off the line where the house is, but the house should have been built six feet off the line.

But it's very old.

It's 105 years old.

So that's the stair variance I need.

Now I need three variances for the garage.

One for the front yard, which is the same as the old crappy garage that we're tearing down, and one for the side yard, which is the same distance as the garage is now.

But the real one that is substantial is the percentage of the footprint of the existing house.

It's supposed to be 25 percent.

So I'm like 12 percent away from what's required in that by requesting this garage.

Okay.

So John, being that our job is to grant the least amount of variances, can that is there a reason why the size of the garage cannot be reduced?

Yes.

That 20 by 20 is the minimum I can do.

That means I have 19 by 19 inside, and that's the minimum for two cars.

So anything less I wouldn't, and I'm not even thinking about his lawnmower.

That has to go somewhere else.

The two cars will just fit exactly in that garage.

Why does it need to be two cars?

Why not one c one car garage that is any second park party for the four?

People have two cars.

You know, that's just kind of how it is these days, you know, and and parking up on Dearborn Street is very difficult.

Um plus those two cars that you have, you like to have them in there for the snow and um have you know, I I understand, but we seem you know, this is just my personal.

This is quite a bit of a bearish, you know.

And that you know, as you know, our role is to minimize that.

So really I'm trying to find the compelling reason to really say, okay, well, you know, allow you to allow me to think about it.

Because we said in precedence, you know, by going off I want this to be, you know, approved and all that stuff.

We said in precedent here.

So really I you know, you know, we all like to have bigger houses.

We all like to have three or four car garages, but at the end of the day, we're here to address the barrances that they and the requirements and how we can minimize that.

So I'm hoping that you can just well, I I would also say I come with a lot of garages.

So and most of those garages don't have the characteristics of this lot, which is a lot that slopes down about eight to ten feet.

So this is a unique lot that it also has access from both sides.

If I had another garage where I had to have a driveway come through the property to get to it, then you could say, hey, you know, it is substantial, it will feel odd, but adding another eight feet to this garage where someone could just put asphalt there and possibly just park alongside of it is really may not do justice to to this lot.

Also, we'll be repairing a very horrible dilapidated garage down there.

So I really know the owners want a two-car garage.

Um Scott and I were talking about it because the owner does have a classic car and he's retiring.

He's coming from California to retire in New Rochelle, and part of his hope was to have a two-car garage here that he could use.

And I think this is a is a really good opportunity for a less intrusive two-car garage compared to some of the ones I do on other applications.

As you could see with this section here, um it's quite lower.

It also um, you know, fronts uh Halligan Hall there, where Holy Name has no parking.

It's a church.

It has, you know, I I attend Holy Name, and um there's no parking at all for the for the the school is closed, but the church is there with parking, so that it's a parking issue in this area.

A lot of the houses are on are on smaller lots.

Getting those two cars off the street and into a garage is probably good for the neighborhood in general.

And that would I I would think would uh help the balancing test in that you know you're you're you're doing a um, you know, I submitted some very detailed points, which I don't want to read and and go through each point, but I I think it's um it's it's a good application.

John may ask you an easier one.

Yes.

Can you comply with the side yard of six feet?

I couldn't move it over six feet if I needed to.

I mean you're building it new.

I don't I wouldn't have to fire rate it.

You wouldn't have the fire rate and you know, we just uh you eliminate a variance.

Eliminate a variance.

I don't I don't have a you know I I don't have a problem with that relationship that ratio between the house and the garage.

I don't know.

I I think we should get rid of that thing, but what honestly or maybe I could put a coverage on the back of the face.

But that's me.

But anyway.

But um, you know, in an effort uh for uh the board myself, perhaps maybe we can make a six foot side yard and that would happen.

Eliminate one of those variances.

We could go with the six-foot variant side yard if you if you like.

Seems like it would be nice to remove one of the four variances, since one seems to be quite substantial.

I have to agree with my colleague on that.

Excellent suggestion.

Would you like to adjourn, Mr.

Woodruff?

Um, could you vote on this application that's before us?

I would go with a six.

No, I'm sorry, we can't.

Side yard.

No.

You'd have to come back in September.

Can't make it conditional.

No.

I don't know.

Counsel.

Can we m make a motion to approve the an application if it's conditional upon the actual construction being shifted?

They want to eliminate uh by four feet.

Which would eliminate a variance.

You can make conditions to the approval, which would include that.

And it would eliminate one variance.

Yes, he no, it would remove a variance.

But would require new plans to move the structure over.

We would require new plans, and that's the thing.

Yeah, but wouldn't I require new plans you were putting in front of uh documentation for the just submitted to Regina to get stamped?

Yeah.

I've done that before.

Well, it's not that simple.

I'd have to give it to the plan examiner first to re like make sure that there is less of a variance.

Well, if we if we approve three if this board were to approve three of the four variances.

I know, but in the past it's it could become a problem.

Are we really to adjourn this and have and come back with new drawings?

I'm sorry.

Okay.

Sorry, John.

Okay.

We're moving it about uh, you know, about three point two feet.

So it's not a big move.

But we're okay with it.

All right.

Would you like to adjourn?

Yes.

Your request is granted.

We'll see you in September.

Oh, you'll see in me in two minutes.

Next case, case 25, 108 Pengilly Drive.

Thank you once again, John Woodruff, the architect with offices in New Rochelle, New York.

And I'm here with um JD Mitra.

He's the owner of 108 Pengilli.

And uh we're here to request a six-yard uh fence and uh variance and a deck and patio legalization.

Um this is an interesting site because it's the house fronts on Pengili.

Here's the front walk, and here's the house itself.

And behind us is Weaver Street, and then we're also on Pengilly here as we come around the corner.

So this house has three front yards.

It's um it's like an island.

And all of those front yards uh are unique, and all the zoning classifies let I'll take the fence first, um, because that's what we're looking for a variance for as a four-foot high fence.

So right now we have some illegal conditions um where we have the fence over the property line, and we plan to remove that.

So these two corners you can see on the drawings are a little shaded in green, and they're uh triangles, and they're called triangles of visibility.

We all learn a new term tonight, and those are what's required when you have any obstruction as you approach a street um and you need to have those areas clear.

Right now we don't have those areas clear, and we propose to take items out of the triangle of visibility, and that's 40 feet by 40 feet.

That's what's um the required depth.

So here we will be taking out arborvides, and we will be taking our fence and angling it to be within our property line.

Right now there's a six-foot fence along the rear, which we hope to keep with a variance, and then once we get past this point, we plan to drop our fence down to four feet along the house and then four feet across the front.

Right now that's a six-foot fence, and you can see from the dotted line on your drawing where it is placed right now in a bad location, um, possibly causing a problem for for drivers to navigate onto the road.

So that's our variance.

We're hoping to get the six-foot fence in the rear.

Um, a lot of the other neighbors have the six-foot.

I have some photos of those adjacent properties who have the same fence.

At the same time, we need a uh variance for one of the decks.

There's three, there's a patio here that we're legal legalizing, which is zoning compliant.

There's a deck here, which is zoning compliant, and then we have this pesky deck here, which requires two variances.

I'm sorry, John.

Which one is it?

You say so there's four things in uh um you need to legalize the actual two decks patio.

Yeah, so I'm legalizing the patio here.

Okay.

That's compliant to zoning, no variance required.

Um legalizing this deck here, which requires no variance, but it's part of the legalization process.

And then this deck right here, that's the one that needs two variances.

So I just want to show you some photos.

If I can not scrolling here for some reason.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong.

I can see that well.

Don't look at the picture.

Okay.

Let's see.

Okay, here we go.

Oh no, it's not letting me do it.

Sorry denial.

Okay, so here's a photo of the side of the house.

You can see this is on Pengilli.

This is our fence that we intend to move back.

This is back behind Weaver Street.

What is it?

We hope to keep this fence at six foot high.

This is from the interior of the property.

We have the fence, which is hidden from the occupants in the house with some arborvides.

And here is the zoning compliant patio that we're talking about, and here's our arborvities that we have inside and our fence, which we hope to keep.

Here is the desk, the deck that needs the variance.

It's an interesting deck.

It's actually sort of like an upside down deck, right?

Because it's only about six or eight inches high, and then you climb down stairs about three or four feet, and you're sort of below grade here, and it's a sitting area with a um a little uh gas.

That's not a group.

Uh cooktop there.

So it's a it's a privacy deck.

So it needs a variance, but I don't think it's a typical deck that we see, like the one behind us where it's elevated.

So this is the deck that needs the variance.

This sunken, it's a sunken deck.

John, sorry, is it so it's really a patio, your legal?

It's really a patio.

But it's deck material and it's lower than 18 inches above grade.

Yes, it's lower than 18 inches.

It's right at grade.

So it's almost like a uh like a little bunker there.

Um, John, um, talk to me about the actual fence on you were talking about where is that in in reference to this?

Yeah, so let's see.

So in the fence.

Sorry, this thing is just not corporate.

There we go.

I can't get back to my plan, I'm sorry.

What?

Plenty of pictures.

I don't know.

You try this.

Oh, that's the only way to do it.

I'll try anything.

So here is the fence in this location here that we plan to hope to get a variance for to keep at six foot high.

What is the reason you need the extra two feet?

Privacy was it, what is it what is it doing?

Why is a four-foot?

It's a little bit of everything.

Um, the four-foot fence can't screen the heavy weaver traffic.

They can't mitigate the street noise or provide basic backyard privacy.

Um here's some several adjacent nearby properties that have uh identical fences, which I'm just gonna.

I know it's legal, do you know?

Is this the fence from this?

So there's several several uh fences that are um adjacent nearby properties feature identical fences uh to cope with the local traffic.

Um I also have two letters in support of the application, one from the person directly across the street from us, and one for the person uh to the left of us.

Um John to the left.

Can you point on the diagram where that is?

So I have one from the person who is here on this house, and I have one from the person who is here.

This is weaving.

Um also our fence will no longer obstruct necessary sight lines for a vehicular safety at the intersection.

And um really the the problem, the difficulty stems from a massive shift of local traffic patterns over time, compounded by the property's unique three frontage geometry.

The residence was constructed in 1957, a time when Weaver Street was a lightly traveled local road.

Today traffic volumes have expanded drastically.

Pengilli is also a heavily utilized as a cut through uh by drivers seeking to avoid the traffic signal at Quaker Ridge Road.

So a lot of people when they're getting on Quaker on Weaver Street here, and it's all backed up, there's a light here, and they all cut through Pengilli to come through the property.

So you get a large backup of of street traffic here at night and in the evenings, and there's a lot of street noise there.

Um Weaver Street is a state road, it's Route 125.

So we also require a DOT permit on this road.

Um those photos that I sent you.

Um I nearly lost my life out there taking those photos of those adjacent fences.

The traffic there, there is no shoulder, there's no place to no sidewalks to no sidewalks.

So um a six-foot fence there, I don't think it's a bad idea for privacy and um the traffic that Weaver Street has now.

Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on this case?

Does anybody else have any other questions or comments on the board?

Would anyone like to make a motion on this?

Okay, I'll make a motion.

You were gonna do it.

That's all right.

Case number 25-2026.

Should I deb Mitra for permission to legalize upper and lower wood deck, hot tub, concrete patio, and six-foot high fence in the front yard for an existing dimensionally non-conforming one family dwelling.

Remove existing fence and planting in cities right of way and install a new four-foot high fence.

Whereas the proposed six-foot high fence exceeds the maximum permitted of four feet in the front yard, whereas the proposed twelve point seven five foot front yard setback of lower level deck is less than the minimum required of twenty-five feet, whereas the proposed side yard setbacks of two point seven five feet for lower deck, lower level deck, and seven foot for upper level deck is less than the minimum required of twelve feet in an R1-15 zone district at the premises of one oh eight Pengilly Drive, block 2528, lot 64, and seeking an area variance.

I move that we approve this variance.

Um when applying the balancing tests, uh, as to the first point, whether the benefit can be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant.

Um I think that there are perhaps other uh ways in which the applicant may be able to achieve um the same or or close to the same benefit, but the unique aspects of this lot and the fact that it has multiple front uh yards um coupled with the location of of the lot itself make those other options perhaps perhaps less feasible.

Uh whether there'll be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to nearby properties, I don't believe that there will be.

Um there are numerous other properties with similar um features that are visible and as to the other aspects of this application, I don't believe that they're visible to the neighborhood, and so they won't have an undesirable change um to the character.

Whether the request is substantial, uh aspects of this request are substantial, but I don't believe that that is a reason to deny the variance.

Whether the request will have an adverse physical or environmental effect, we've heard no indication that there would be, and whether the alleged difficulty is self-created, it is.

Um, but I don't believe that that is uh a reason to deny this variance, and so I move that we approve uh this application.

Second time Bob Sanziel?

Yes.

Fernando Arias?

Yes.

Abel Rodriguez?

Yes.

Carla Clapper?

Yes.

Mark McLean?

Yes.

Charlotte Abadier.

Yes.

Erica Eisner.

Yes.

The motion's been approved.

Thank you.

With that, I move that we adjourn this meeting.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

No.

Okay.

The meetings adjourned.

Have a good night.

Okay.