Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board adjourns 208 Westchester Ave impervious‑surface case pending city engineer review on drainage
Summary
The Zoning Board postponed a decision on a requested impervious‑surface variance at 208 Westchester Ave after lengthy debate about basement flooding, stormwater discharge to the street, and alternatives; the board will request comments from the city engineer and the applicant will return next month.
The Mount Vernon Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 18 adjourned the public hearing on a requested impervious‑surface variance for 208 Westchester Avenue after members asked the applicant to seek city engineer guidance and consider alternatives to full paving.
The applicant, represented by architect Shaheem Badali, sought an area variance for impervious surface on a two‑family residence in the RMF 6.75 zone. The application listed lot coverage: impervious surface required 70 percent, proposed 80.26 percent; variance requested 18.26 percentage points.
Board members and the applicant discussed the source of basement water infiltration, the scope of exterior work (porch, entry, replacement of the two‑tire‑strip driveway), and whether paving the strips next to the foundation would reduce water in the basement. The owner explained the house has ongoing infiltration problems during heavy rains and said repairs to the foundation would be expensive; paving was presented as a lower‑cost mitigation.
The owner told the board the work is intended “to prevent any further water damage inside of the basement,” describing recurring puddling in heavy rain that seeps into the foundation. Board members pressed the applicant on alternatives such as foundation excavation and waterproofing, French drains or dry wells, curb or trench drains, and whether any soil percolation testing had been done. An applicant representative estimated full foundation excavation and waterproofing could cost upwards of roughly $125,000, which the owner said was prohibitive.
Several board members emphasized that direct discharge of property stormwater to the public storm system (MS4) typically requires approval by the city engineer. A staff member advised the board that city engineer signoff is needed for direct connections to the municipal storm system; the board agreed to request formal comments from the city engineer and other reviewing departments (DPW, building, police, fire) before taking final action.
Given outstanding technical questions on stormwater control and alternatives, the board voted to adjourn the application to the next monthly meeting and to forward the file to the city engineer for comment. The applicant was encouraged to obtain engineering proposals and to present any revised drainage solutions — including dry wells or curb/trench drainage — when the case returns.
