Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA approves Metropolis Country Club staff‑housing replacement with setback and height variances
Summary
The Greenburgh ZBA granted Metropolis Country Club an amended special permit and two variances to replace two staff‑housing buildings with one modular building; the board required landscaping/screening and forestry‑officer approval as conditions and noted a reduced impervious footprint.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Greenburgh Zoning Board of Appeals voted to grant Metropolis Country Club an amended special permit and two area variances to replace two existing staff‑housing buildings with a single, more efficient modular structure.
Annie Klein, the club's attorney, told the board the proposal would replace “in kind the two existing staff housing buildings” with one building about 5,215 square feet, reducing the combined impervious footprint by about 630 square feet while adding two ADA spaces. Klein said the project seeks two area variances: to increase the maximum accessory‑structure height from 12 feet to 22.8 feet and to reduce the membership‑club setback requirement from 200 feet to approximately 19 feet; she noted the existing buildings sit about 15 feet from the property line and the replacement will be pushed back roughly four feet from that existing location.
Zach Pearson, the project engineer, walked the board through the site plan and stormwater approach, saying the consolidated building would sit in the same general location as the existing staff housing and that stormwater would be routed to a level spreader and returned across the golf course. The engineer said the new building’s eaves will sit lower than the current structures and that evergreen screening will be added along the property line.
Club president Andy Nathan described the building as a “taupey gray” intended to blend into the setting and said the applicant plans to add evergreen plantings to minimize visibility from neighboring lots.
Several board members emphasized screening and forestry review. One member noted that applicants who remove trees must replace them and recommended that any removal and replacement be subject to the town forestry officer’s approval; the board made landscaping and forestry‑officer sign‑off a condition of the approval.
The board’s motion to grant the amended special permit and the requested variances included standard conditions: applicants must obtain all necessary agency approvals, file final plans with the building department, begin construction within 12 months of the last required approval, and proceed in conformity with the plans on file unless a subsequent approval modifies them. The board also required that any tree removals be mitigated through replacement plantings and that an approved screening plan be implemented to the forestry officer’s satisfaction.
The decision reflects the board’s finding that the replacement is an in‑kind consolidation that reduces impervious area while providing modernized staff housing; the board noted that the proposal will remain subject to any necessary permits and inspections.
