Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adjournment Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA delays decision on 14 Russell Avenue conversion; architect must return with fuller variance justification
Summary
The board continued the public hearing on a proposed two-family conversion and five variances for 14 Russell Avenue to the Nov. 5 meeting, instructing the applicant to supply complete principal points addressing the five-factor variance test for each variance.
The New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals continued the public hearing on an application to convert an existing commercial building at 14 Russell Avenue to a two-family dwelling and to renew previously granted variances. The matter was adjourned to the board’s Nov. 5 meeting so the applicant’s architect can present, in person, a fuller justification for each of five requested variances.
Jose Luis, speaking for AirQPC Architecture, and property owner Harold Cabrera appeared. The owner told the board he purchased the property in February 2024 and said he intended to move his family to New Rochelle. The board said the written submission of principal points did not address all five factors the board considers for each variance and asked that the architect explain, for each variance, why it satisfies those factors.
A board member told the applicants, "5 variances is a lot of variances. And as everybody has said, we do need justification for each and every one." The board advised the applicant to return with the project architect and to address all five balancing-test factors in the principal-points letter for each variance. The application cites a lot area of 2,708 square feet versus a stated minimum requirement of 3,500 square feet for two-family properties in the submission, and a parking requirement the applicant said cannot be met (applicant said two spaces are available where four are required).
The applicant asked for an adjournment, which the board granted. Regina O’Hare, clerk for the Department of Buildings, told the audience, "Wednesday, November 5 is the next meeting. There'll be a sign. You do not get re-noticed, just so you know. And it'll be on our website." The board encouraged the architect to consult with city staff before the next appearance to refine the principal points.
No formal vote on the merits was taken at this meeting; the matter remains open pending submission of the requested information and the architect’s in-person presentation.
