Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coverage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA approves patio coverage variance in Armonk, requires town-engineer sign-off on drainage
Summary
After debate over existing nonconforming coverage and drainage, the Zoning Board approved a variance for 8 Hollow Ridge Road in Armonk but required the applicant to satisfy the town engineer and the building inspector’s mitigation requirements before a building permit is issued.
The North Castle Zoning Board of Appeals voted to approve a coverage variance for 8 Hollow Ridge Road in Armonk while attaching conditions that require the town engineer and building inspector to sign off on stormwater mitigation before any building permit is issued.
Nick Ericman, principal designer at Glendale Company, and attorney Katie Wendell said the project replaces failing patio hardscape, adds a fireplace and enlarges an outdoor kitchen in the existing footprint. Wendell said the net increase in impervious surface, after accounting for removals and replacements, is 63 square feet. "The net increase once you adjust for all of those is only the 63 square feet," Wendell told the board.
Board members pressed on a discrepancy between the applicant’s stated net increase and the total existing nonconforming coverage. One committee member reviewed the figures from the packet and said the property’s gross land coverage allowed by code is roughly 14,551 square feet while the existing condition totals approximately 21,378 square feet — a difference of about 6,800 square feet that the member called "a big variance." The applicant disputed the characterization, saying most of the existing hardscape is preexisting and that their filing addresses only the additional 63 square feet the proposed work would create.
Engineering review and letters were discussed at length. The town engineer’s updated comments (an April 7 letter updated June 3) asked the applicant to provide a stormwater mitigation design and calculations for the net increase and to document how runoff from the new impervious area will be collected and discharged. The applicant’s engineer told the board they had addressed two of three comments and proposed routing the small increase to daylight if no mitigation system exists on the property. The board asked for written confirmation and for the town engineer to sign off.
The town building inspector, who joined the meeting by phone, told the board that all engineering comments and mitigation items must be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit and that the building department will enforce those conditions.
After discussing whether to defer the application for more formal written approval from the town engineer or to approve with conditions, the board concluded that conditional approval tied to the town engineer’s and building inspector’s sign-off would protect neighboring properties. The motion approved the variance based on the applicant's representation they would abide by those engineering and inspection requirements; the building permit will not be issued until the mitigation items are satisfied.
Why it matters: The action regularizes long-standing, preexisting hardscape while adding a small new area; the board attached a condition intended to limit downstream drainage impacts by tying final authorization to the town engineer and building inspector.
Next steps: Applicant must satisfy the town engineer’s items (including a mitigation design if required) and secure building-department approval before starting construction.
