Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Addition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves rear‑setback variance for screened‑in patio at Oak Ledge Road
Summary
The Zoning Board granted an area‑variance extension to enclose an existing semicircular patio at a single‑family home on Oak Ledge Road, after confirming the structure is the same footprint as the existing patio and that DPW had no substantive comments.
Oak Ledge Road — The Mount Vernon Zoning Board of Appeals on Sept. 16 approved an area‑variance request and time extension to enclose an existing semicircular patio as a screened three‑season room at a single‑family home on Oak Ledge Road. The board approved the application unanimously.
Applicant and design: Paul Spai is the property owner; architect George Restivo presented the project to convert an existing 293‑square‑foot flagstone patio to a screened, roofed three‑season room using the patio’s existing footprint. Restivo told the board the enclosure would add no plumbing or heating and would be used primarily for family and grandchildren’s safety along a rear grade drop.
Why it matters: The proposed enclosure requires a rear‑yard setback area variance because the measured distance from the house to the rear property line was reported in the file as less than the 20‑foot requirement (the application reported a 2.8‑foot encroachment into the required rear yard). The board reviewed the application, heard a neighbor’s comment and found the other technical agencies either had no comments or provided consent.
Staff review and public comment: DPW reported no comments on the proposed work, observing that no work appears to occur beyond the property line. The board noted a consent letter from an adjacent property owner at 9 Sturgis Road (Corey Gish). Neighbor Mark Hershey, whose property backs onto the lot, asked the board to consider alternatives such as a taller fence; Mr. Spai and his architect said the screened room is proposed primarily to prevent an accidental fall from a backyard grade and to make the patio usable for grandchildren.
Board findings and vote: The board weighed the five variance factors, noting that the enclosed patio replaces an existing patio and that the enclosure is screened (no permanent increase in plumbing or heating). Members concluded the enclosure would not cause a change in neighborhood character, that alternatives (higher fence) were discussed but that the screened enclosure met the owner’s safety objectives, and that DPW had no objections. The board unanimously approved the variance and advised the applicant to apply for all required building permits and inspections.
