Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garden City Zoning Board Grants Multiple Variances, Denies One Pool Application and Opens Study of Pet‑cremation Proposal
Summary
On May 19, 2026, the Garden City Board of Zoning Appeals approved variances for multiple residential properties, unanimously denied a pool-and-cabana application at 59 Osborne Road for not meeting new pool regulations, and voted to study environmental impacts of a proposed animal cremation facility at 64 Commercial Avenue.
The Incorporated Village of Garden City Board of Zoning Appeals on May 19, 2026, voted to grant a slate of residential variances and permits for additions, pool installations and equipment setbacks across the village, denied a single pool application at 59 Osborne Road, and opened a study and SEQRA review for a proposal to convert a warehouse at 64 Commercial Avenue into an alkaline‑hydrolysis animal cremation facility.
Acting Chair James Van Schoick led the meeting and called for votes on each agenda item. The board approved appeals and applications for multiple homeowners — including projects at 38 Laurel Street, 84 Sixth Street, 58 Dartmouth Street, 82 Poplar Street, 121 Tullamore Road, 16 St. James Street South, 14 Raymond Court and 93 Brook Street — all by unanimous vote. Member Alex Bachowski summarized the Dolan pool proposal as complying with setback requirements and said conditions would include no in‑pool lighting and an estate‑style fence; the board approved that application unanimously.
Member Christine Rio moved to deny the Sanzeris' application at 59 Osborne Road, saying, “The pool does not comply with the recently adopted pool regulations by the Board of Trustees.” The Board recorded a unanimous vote to deny the application and appeal; Rio and the chair noted the applicants could return with revised plans that meet the new regulations.
On Wag in Peace, Inc.'s request to use 64 Commercial Avenue as an alkaline‑hydrolysis pet cremation facility, Acting Chair Van Schoick said the board would pursue additional information and environmental review because of substantial community concern and uncertainty about potential corrosive or other environmental impacts. “The board has taken the position that we will be performing a study in regards to this appeal and in regards to the SEQRA requirement and the environmental review, and seeking additional information,” he said, and the board adjourned further consideration pending that review.
Votes at a glance: the board recorded unanimous approval for appeals and applications moved to grant by Members Rio, Bachowski or Williams in the cases listed above; the Sanzeri pool/cabana application was denied on a motion by Member Rio; the Wag in Peace matter was postponed for study and SEQRA review.
The board noted routine conditions attached to pool approvals (no in‑pool lighting, no overhead pool illumination, no diving board or slide; fence and landscaping per submitted plans). The Fechts' matter was also scheduled for ADRB on May 27, 2026, per the application record. The Board closed the session after recording the votes and adjourned further action on the commercial cremation proposal until staff and applicants provide the requested environmental and technical information.
Next procedural steps: applicants who received denials or variances were told they may revise plans and return; Wag in Peace will be subject to an environmental review and additional public input before the Board considers a decision.
