Rye Brook ZBA grants variances for Millers’ North Ridge Street addition, with condition barring enclosure above portico

The Rye Brook Zoning Board of Appeals on May 6 provisionally granted variances to Kevin Miller and Emily Miller for a second-floor addition, a new front porch and related work at 123 North Ridge Street, finding the requested relief would not unduly change neighborhood character while imposing conditions including a prohibition on enclosing or building above the portico.

The variances were sought because the property lies in the Scenic Road Overlay District, which increases the front-yard setback to 45 feet. The board’s resolution records that the proposed story addition and porch would result in a front-yard setback of 34.5 feet — 10.6 feet short of the overlay requirement — and requests variances for a side height setback ratio (proposed 2.8 vs. limit 2.4, variance 0.4) and single-side yard setback (proposed 7.9 feet vs. required 10 feet, variance 2.1 feet). The application was referred by the planning board after reviews on March 13 and April 10 and was classified a Type II action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, requiring no further environmental review.

Architect John Giscola Jr. explained the house is a narrow ranch with a walkout basement and that the scenic overlay setback line “goes through the house,” which is why relief was requested. He told the board the design team examined alternatives, including pulling the second floor back and adding an overhang to avoid a height-setback ratio, but planning staff and the planning board found that solution unattractive and the applicants reverted to the current proposal. Giscola said the front hammerhead parking originally proposed was removed and the deck was relocated to line up with an existing nonconforming side-yard line so the deck itself is as of right.

The board reviewed a written objection from the Kerrick family of 46 Valley Terrace, read into the record, which said the second-floor addition and middle-level deck “will be overlooking our backyard and our privacy” and that, from their vantage, the house will appear “very high.” Members discussed whether the height-related variance affected the windows and deck that neighbors cited as creating potential privacy impacts. Board members concluded the height variance applied to a corner of the house and not the full rear elevation where the majority of windows are located, and that the deck as presented would be permitted as-of-right.

After reviewing the five statutory variance factors in the Village Code, board members found the requested relief would not adversely impact neighborhood character and that the applicants had shown there was no feasible alternative that would entirely eliminate the need for variances. The board characterized the need for relief as self-created and noted the variances are substantial, but they voted to provisionally grant the application on condition that all application and consultant fees be paid and that no building be erected above the portico; any future proposal to enclose or build above the portico would require returning to the ZBA.

The motion passed unanimously: five yes, zero nays. The resolution identifies the property as parcel ID 135.59-1-34 and cites Village of Rye Brook zoning code sections dealing with height-setback ratios, single side-yard setbacks and the Scenic Road Overlay.

Board members who voted in favor were Steve (ZBA member), Glenn (ZBA member), Jamie (ZBA member), Joe (ZBA member) and Don (ZBA member).