New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - July 7, 2026
New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - July 7, 2026
The New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals met on July 7, 2026, at 7:00 PM (11:00 UTC) to hear three variance applications. The meeting was chaired by Erica Eisner. The board approved the minutes from the May meeting, heard public testimony, and deliberated on each case. One application (108 Pengilly Drive) was approved unanimously; the other two were adjourned to the September meeting.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes Approval: The board voted unanimously to approve the minutes from the May 2026 meeting.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Case 20-2026 (40 Beach Road):
- Opposition: Greg Varian, attorney for neighbors Hillary and Jake J (27 Springdale Road), argued that the proposed two-story addition is massive (expanding a house already expanded twice, to 4,700 sq ft) and extends into the required rear yard setback by 16 feet (66% deviation), later revised to 12 feet (60% deviation). He stated the variance is substantial and would negatively impact the neighbors' property value and quality of life. He asserted the applicant failed to justify the variance and requested denial.
- Support: James Sullivan (60 Linwood Road) spoke in favor, describing the Hammonds as excellent neighbors who host community events, and argued the addition fits the neighborhood tenor.
- Case 24-2026 (22 Dearborn Street): No public comments from opposition or support were recorded.
- Case 25-2026 (108 Pengilly Drive): No public comments from the audience were recorded, but the applicant submitted two letters of support from neighbors.
Discussion Items
- Case 20-2026 – 40 Beach Road (Garage and Suite Addition): Applicant Jim Fleming (architect) and owners Jason and Devin Hammonds proposed a new single-car garage with a second-story suite for their elderly mother. The lot is a corner lot with unique constraints. The applicant sought variances for rear yard setback (12 feet vs. required 30 feet) and side yard. After the last meeting, the plan was revised to move the addition 6 feet away from Springdale and narrow it by 2 feet to improve the neighbor's view corridor. The board questioned the substantial deviation (60% from 30 feet) and whether the height could be reduced. The neighbor, Jacob Yanoviak, stated the height was the primary concern. The applicant chose to adjourn to September to provide additional comparison data regarding neighborhood character.
- Case 24-2026 – 22 Dearborn Street (Garage and Stair Variances): Architect John Woodruff requested four variances to replace a dilapidated one-car garage (12x18 ft) with a new two-car garage (20x20 ft) and to legalize a stair. The garage would maintain existing non-conforming side and front yard setbacks (2.8 ft vs. required 6 ft). The new variance would be for lot coverage (12% over the 25% limit). The board suggested reducing the side yard from 2.8 ft to 6 ft to eliminate one variance. The applicant agreed to revise plans and the case was adjourned to September.
- Case 25-2026 – 108 Pengilly Drive (Fence and Deck Legalization): John Woodruff and owner JD Mitra sought variances for a 6-foot-high fence in the front yard (max 4 ft) and legalization of a sunken deck (below 18 inches above grade) with insufficient front and side yard setbacks. The property has three front yards due to its corner location on Weaver Street (Route 125) and Pengilly Drive. The applicant argued that increased traffic on Weaver Street necessitates a 6-foot fence for privacy and safety, and that the deck is essentially a patio. The board found the variances justifiable given the unique lot configuration and approved the motion.
Key Outcomes
- Case 20-2026 – 40 Beach Road: Adjourned to the September meeting. The applicant will provide additional data comparing the proposed addition to neighboring lots.
- Case 24-2026 – 22 Dearborn Street: Adjourned to the September meeting. The applicant will revise plans to shift the garage 3.2 feet to achieve a 6-foot side yard setback, eliminating one of the four variances.
- Case 25-2026 – 108 Pengilly Drive: Approved unanimously (8-0). The board granted variances for the 6-foot fence, the sunken deck setbacks, and legalization of the decks and patio. The motion cited the unique three-frontage lot, the lack of negative neighborhood impact, and the absence of adverse environmental effects.
Meeting Transcript
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.
openpublica.com