Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Peekskill Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - February 19, 2026

Meeting Portal — Thursday, February 19, 2026

BodyPeekskill, New York

SessionMeeting Portal

DateThursday, February 19, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 2:15:16

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

0:00

Let us see us.

0:01

Let us see ourselves.

0:02

There we go.

0:03

Okay.

0:03

All right.

0:05

I thought we were getting cartoons.

0:09

Okay, good evening.

0:11

Um welcome to our uh February regularly scheduled meeting of the zoning board of appeals.

0:18

We have two items on our agenda tonight.

0:21

Uh the first of our two items on the agenda um is a continued public hearing.

0:28

And also the public hearing is regarding an area two area variances as a matter of fact.

0:33

Uh the applicant is ARQ architecture PC.

0:38

Uh George B.

0:39

Hernandez, registered architect.

0:41

Um the owner is Andrew Rolando Dutan Chapa.

0:47

The address is 1891 Carhartt Avenue.

0:51

Uh public hearing regarding area variances related to off-street parking and maneuvering pursuant to sections 575-12 G8A of the ordinance and the location of accessory buildings on the lot pursuant to Section 575-22 D4B to legalize a finished apartment, accessory structures, enlargement of the driveway, and the construction of new front bluestone steps and pathway on the subject property again, 1891 Carhartt Avenue.

1:24

Before we start, as you can see, we have the minimum four-member quorum.

1:31

So with that, uh, in order for a decision to be affirmatively passed, we need a unanimous decision here.

1:41

Uh with that in mind, are you are you are you willing to move ahead with that or are you willing to would you be considering us adjourning this so that we have more you know to which would be to the next month when we would have you know more members, hopefully.

2:01

Um I think we're comfortable continuing.

2:04

Okay.

2:05

So be it, and we will.

2:07

All right, so um Mr.

2:11

Hernandez, yes.

2:13

You can lead us off.

2:15

Good evening, JB Hernandez, architecture for architect for the project.

2:20

Um I just want to recap because I know some of the more board members may not be uh aware of the whole project.

2:28

We started a year ago.

2:30

This project um had required um few remedies to build, you know, items that were built without the benefit of a permit on the property.

2:43

Uh there have been a work stop.

2:45

We uh met with the build inspector and we went through the process of legalizing or remedying these issues.

2:53

The last time uh last year when we're in front of your board and also the planning commission, um some of the items that were suggested or the easier path to remedy this have been to um merge the two lots that he owns.

3:09

He owns two adjacent lots uh and that would have eliminated uh most of the variances on the right side of the property.

3:16

As we move along with Mr.

3:18

Dutan, um unfortunately he experienced real quickly that the expense of getting a new survey, filing all of that, it was gonna be become uh there was no benefit for him to keep the stone wall.

3:35

So he decided to stop the process of merging the lots and proposed to eliminate the item that required uh a variance on the right side of the property.

3:47

Okay.

3:47

Um on the left side, there were three items.

3:51

There was the uh an aha out house, and there was another storage area that it was created.

3:58

Uh what we have done is that we have proposed to relocate those to an area where the variance is not required.

4:08

We're moving up the hill, if you if you may say.

4:11

Um the other items that we had is that that it's an old shed that is uh very um it's been there for many years, and it's a small shed, and that one he will prefer to keep and does the one one of the variants that they were seeking today.

4:30

Um the other item is that we're proposing parking on the side of the house.

4:36

Um the way the you know we went through the interpretation of the code, and I think we agree that it's not in the front yard, it's on the side yard, but when we create a maneuvering area, we are within uh four feet of the property line with maneuvering area, not the parking, and that requires a two-foot variance because we're supposed to be uh six feet feet away.

5:00

Um I believe that I mean I read the the uh report from the staff.

5:05

I think we in agreement.

5:06

I don't know if there's an additional question.

5:09

We saw the comments from one of the neighbor, I know there are comments.

5:13

Uh but there is no, you know, there's no construction going on there now.

5:20

It is um and there is no parking of construction vehicles allow or being done right now.

5:26

So if that's part of the you know resolution, that's we're fine with that as well.

5:31

Right.

5:32

Uh yeah, okay.

5:33

I um thank you.

5:36

Um before we continue, uh need a motion to um reopen the public hearing on this application.

5:44

I move we reopen the public hearing.

5:46

Second, second, all in favor?

5:48

Aye, okay.

5:50

Um do we have anybody out there that would like to speak either for or on this application?

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████68%

Parking Management████████12%

Procedural██████9%

Pending Litigation███5%

Public Engagement██3%

Permitting and Compliance█2%

Personnel Matters█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Peekskill Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - February 19, 2026

The Zoning Board of Appeals held a regular meeting on Thursday, February 19, 2026, starting at 7:45 p.m. The board consisted of a four-member quorum, requiring unanimous decisions. Two major items were addressed: a continued public hearing for area variances at 1891 Carhartt Avenue (ARQ Architecture) and a continued public hearing and regular meeting for an appeal regarding non-conforming uses at 711 North Division Street (Christopher Warn). The meeting also included discussion of officer elections and approval of previous minutes, which were postponed due to absent members.

Public Comments & Testimony

Vince Ferrandino (neighbor of 1891 Carhartt Ave): Submitted a letter read into the record. He opposed the proposed widening of the front driveway for additional parking, citing concerns it would become a staging area for construction vehicles. He requested denial of the variance or a condition prohibiting construction vehicle parking. He also expressed frustration with the prolonged duration of the application, noting violations from March 2024 still pending.
Jacqueline Cohen (attorney for Christopher Warn): Presented arguments that the contractor's yard use at 711 N Division St is a pre-existing non-conforming use and that the expansion was not impermissible. She referenced case law and proposed using an existing fence line as a demarcation for the lawful extent of the use.
Danny Gavada (owner of Taconic Towing, tenant at 711 N Division St): Testified that his towing business has operated on the property for over 30 years. He stated that if the board required restoration of the northern side yard, his business would be forced to shut down. He confirmed that all stored vehicles are registered and operable, and that he has no alternative location in the city.

Discussion Items

1891 Carhartt Ave – Area Variances: The applicant, ARQ Architecture (JB Hernandez), sought two variances: a 4-foot setback variance for the parking maneuvering area (6 ft required) and a 1.66-foot setback variance for an existing woodshed (6 ft required). The project aimed to legalize existing unpermitted improvements. The board reviewed staff recommendations and considered conditions to prohibit commercial vehicle parking and storage. Public hearing was reopened, closed, and then voted on.
711 N Division St – Appeal and Non-Conforming Use Expansion: The board debated whether the contractor's yard use had been impermissibly enlarged, extended, or placed on a different portion of the lot since the 1977 zoning code adoption. The draft resolution found that the use had expanded into the northern side yard based on aerial photographs from 2004-2025. The board discussed evidence, including a survey and aerial photos, and considered options: granting the appeal (finding uses permitted or pre-existing non-conforming) but finding impermissible expansion requiring restoration within 180 days, or allowing the applicant to seek a use variance within 60 days. After advice of counsel, the board decided to continue the matter to the next meeting for input from additional members and to allow submission of a marked-up survey.

Key Outcomes

1891 Carhartt Ave – Variances Granted: The board unanimously approved the two area variances with conditions: parking space variance (4-foot setback) and woodshed variance (1.66-foot setback). Conditions include that the parking area is for residential parking only, no storage of materials or supplies, and compliance with city code on commercial vehicles (Section 575-22 D6). The board also issued a SEQR determination of Type II action, no further action required.
711 N Division St – Adjourned to March 19, 2026: The applicant requested and was granted an adjournment to the March 2026 regular meeting. The public hearing was also adjourned. The board will have additional members present, and the applicant will submit a marked-up survey to clarify the impermissible expansion area. The draft resolution remains under consideration, with options for restoration or use variance.
Minutes of Previous Meetings: Minutes from October 16, 2025 and November 2025 were not approved due to insufficient board members who attended those meetings.
Chairperson Announcement: Chairman announced his term expires at the end of February 2026 but will continue as a holdover until a replacement is appointed or he steps down. He encouraged residents to apply for board vacancies.

Meeting Transcript

Let us see us. Let us see ourselves. There we go. Okay. All right. I thought we were getting cartoons. Okay, good evening. Um welcome to our uh February regularly scheduled meeting of the zoning board of appeals. We have two items on our agenda tonight. Uh the first of our two items on the agenda um is a continued public hearing. And also the public hearing is regarding an area two area variances as a matter of fact. Uh the applicant is ARQ architecture PC. Uh George B. Hernandez, registered architect. Um the owner is Andrew Rolando Dutan Chapa. The address is 1891 Carhartt Avenue. Uh public hearing regarding area variances related to off-street parking and maneuvering pursuant to sections 575-12 G8A of the ordinance and the location of accessory buildings on the lot pursuant to Section 575-22 D4B to legalize a finished apartment, accessory structures, enlargement of the driveway, and the construction of new front bluestone steps and pathway on the subject property again, 1891 Carhartt Avenue. Before we start, as you can see, we have the minimum four-member quorum. So with that, uh, in order for a decision to be affirmatively passed, we need a unanimous decision here. Uh with that in mind, are you are you are you willing to move ahead with that or are you willing to would you be considering us adjourning this so that we have more you know to which would be to the next month when we would have you know more members, hopefully. Um I think we're comfortable continuing. Okay. So be it, and we will. All right, so um Mr. Hernandez, yes. You can lead us off. Good evening, JB Hernandez, architecture for architect for the project. Um I just want to recap because I know some of the more board members may not be uh aware of the whole project. We started a year ago. This project um had required um few remedies to build, you know, items that were built without the benefit of a permit on the property. Uh there have been a work stop. We uh met with the build inspector and we went through the process of legalizing or remedying these issues. The last time uh last year when we're in front of your board and also the planning commission, um some of the items that were suggested or the easier path to remedy this have been to um merge the two lots that he owns. He owns two adjacent lots uh and that would have eliminated uh most of the variances on the right side of the property. As we move along with Mr. Dutan, um unfortunately he experienced real quickly that the expense of getting a new survey, filing all of that, it was gonna be become uh there was no benefit for him to keep the stone wall. So he decided to stop the process of merging the lots and proposed to eliminate the item that required uh a variance on the right side of the property. Okay. Um on the left side, there were three items. There was the uh an aha out house, and there was another storage area that it was created. Uh what we have done is that we have proposed to relocate those to an area where the variance is not required. We're moving up the hill, if you if you may say. Um the other items that we had is that that it's an old shed that is uh very um it's been there for many years, and it's a small shed, and that one he will prefer to keep and does the one one of the variants that they were seeking today. Um the other item is that we're proposing parking on the side of the house. Um the way the you know we went through the interpretation of the code, and I think we agree that it's not in the front yard, it's on the side yard, but when we create a maneuvering area, we are within uh four feet of the property line with maneuvering area, not the parking, and that requires a two-foot variance because we're supposed to be uh six feet feet away. Um I believe that I mean I read the the uh report from the staff. I think we in agreement. I don't know if there's an additional question. We saw the comments from one of the neighbor, I know there are comments. Uh but there is no, you know, there's no construction going on there now.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com