Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Patio Walkway Leveling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner to withdraw appeal after DRB clarifies "flat and level" meant a contiguous, sloped surface
Summary
An owner who appealed a DRB decision requiring walkways and patios to be "flat and level" agreed to withdraw the appeal after the board clarified that the intent was a single contiguous surface with gentle slope for drainage, not a literal equal elevation across all adjacent surfaces.
The Reston Design Review Board and the applicant for 212727 Hitchcock Court resolved an appeal on Feb. 18, 2025, after the board clarified that its prior requirement for patios and walkways to be "flat and level" was intended to mean a single contiguous surface with smooth transitions rather than multiple equal elevations.
Why it matters: The appeal centered on whether the board's decision required the homeowner to make the new rear patio exactly the same elevation as adjacent walkways. The homeowner argued leveling the surfaces to a single exact elevation would direct drainage toward the house and be harmful to the property; the original panel said the finish should look workmanlike and form a contiguous walking surface to avoid trip hazards.
At the hearing the homeowner explained that contractors had advised against pavers because the existing ground was not even; the owner's father-in-law had already installed concrete to repair failing surfaces and the applicants later resubmitted the plan to reflect the constructed solution. The homeowner said leveling the patio to match sidewalkways "would shut drainage towards the home and be detrimental to the property." (applicant comment)
Panel member Emily (DRB member) explained the panel's intention: the patio and adjacent walkways should read as a single, smooth surface. "I would not consider this a step," Emily said of the existing slight elevation change; the board's suggestion was to make the surfaces visually contiguous by a mortar bed, veneer stone or similar so the overall appearance is workmanlike and there are no small trip hazards.
After discussion the owner agreed to withdraw the appeal if the applicant would create a single contiguous surface that meets the panel's intent and complete the other previously required caveats. Staff asked the owner to confirm withdrawal by email; the board set a project completion timeline of March 2025 but allowed the owner to request more time from the adviser if needed.
No formal motion to rehear was recorded; instead the parties agreed that clarifying language would be added to the file and the applicant would withdraw the appeal once the owner confirmed they would make the surface contiguous with an appropriate slope for drainage. Staff will inspect the completed work for compliance with the clarified standard.
