Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Deck Legalization topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ZBA legalizes two rear decks at 53 Rose Street after applicant supplies satellite evidence

5907215 · October 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board granted area variances to legalize an existing lower-level 12.5-by-16-foot deck and an upper-level 12-by-12-foot deck at 53 Rose Street, citing evidence that the lower deck predated the owner's 2024 purchase and neighborhood context.

The New Rochelle Zoning Board of Appeals approved variances Thursday to legalize two existing rear decks at 53 Rose Street, concluding the decks preexisted the current ownership and are consistent with neighborhood character.

Attorney Greg Varian, representing owner Pren Chuni, told the board he had submitted a statement of principal points and Google Earth satellite imagery showing the lower deck existed by February 2004. Varian said building department records also show a 1969 violation for construction without a permit that likely references the lower deck.

"We have submitted Google Earth satellite generated imagery proving that this very same deck was built no later than 02/2004," Varian said. He told the board that researching neighboring properties' permit histories would be costly and not dispositive; instead he offered the satellite imagery and the building department violation history as showing the decks existed prior to the owner's purchase in 2024.

The application sought relief to legalize a lower-level 12.5-by-16-foot deck and an upper-level 12-by-12-foot deck. The board identified two specific dimensional variances: a side-yard setback of 3.5 feet where 6 feet is required, and a rear-yard setback of 26.61 feet where 30 feet is required in the R2-7 zone. After applying the standard balancing test for area variances, a board member noted the decks are to the rear of the property and largely screened from public view; satellite imagery also showed similar deck sizes on adjacent properties.

A motion to approve the variances passed unanimously. The board’s approval legalizes the existing structures but does not substitute for required building permits or inspections; the applicant must still secure any needed building-department approvals before construction or alteration.

Board members did not record any neighborhood opposition at the hearing.