These properties are about to change
Which residents went before the Board of Architectural Review this week—and did they get what they wanted?
Should the residents of 62 Stratton Road be allowed to build this garden shed? (far right)
BY DEBORAH SKOLNIK
Scarsdalians cherish their homes—and the right to do what they want with their residences. But there are certain hurdles that residents must pass first; one of these is the Board of Architectural Review (BAR). Here are the cases they heard this week, as well as the outcomes for each.
62 Stratton Road
Unlike many other presentations, the BAR was not set to vote on this one. The case had been referred by the Planning Board, which sought the BAR’s opinion on it. (The Planning Board may do this on matters of placement and aesthetics).
The owners of this property would like to add a 16’ x 10’ garden shed, with a height of 13’ 6”, by the pool. The daughter of one neighbor isn’t a fan of the idea. "[My mother] will be looking onto the shed from her back windows. I am concerned that this shed is excessively large and tall,” she wrote. And yet, the property rep for 62 Stratton said the shed is a necessity. “There will be rafters to put pool toys and stuff,” he said.
“Please consider a redesign of the shed so it’s not so big and tall.”
Board member Marsha Morton said that the homeowners would need to plant some very tall trees out of fairness to the neighbors at 5 Archer Lane, “so they don’t see this looming in their backyard,” she explained. “It’s not a shed, it’s a building.” The property rep said that landscaping could be added. “This [presently] goes under ‘not fair,’” Morton said.
To the property rep’s dismay, the BAR informed him that the matter would go back to the Planning Board. The rep gasped in disbelief. “We lost the December meeting, we lost the January meeting,” he said, presumably in reference to previous attempts to get the project greenlit. “I understand it’s a cumbersome process,” BAR Chair Brad Cetron sympathized. VERDICT: MUST RESUBMIT
23 Springdale Road
By comparison, 23 Springdale Road’s application was a breeze—the property rep requested permission to build some windows and skylights. The BAR had no problem with that. VERDICT: APPROVED
8 Wayside Lane
A husband-and-wife team has purchased this house, which was the husband’s childhood home. The house currently has a garage, which the property rep says is in poor shape. The rep told the Board that the owners would like to make a more generously sized garage in the same location, with an upstairs guest room.
The present garage of 8 Wayside Lane is visible on the left, behind the main house.
The garage doors will resemble a pair of real doors.
“That’s a huge structure,” said Chairman Cetron. Amid concerns about the structure’s height and the kind of screening would be installed around the garage, the Board requested that the property rep return with additional information. VERDICT: HELD OVER
7 NORMANDY LANE
Once again, the BAR heard a relatively simple case, this time for 7 Normandy Lane to amend the color and siding to an addition. The siding will be gray. VERDICT: APPROVED
72 Chase Road’s windows are black in this illustration, something the Board felt was “hackneyed” and would look dated in years to come.
72 CHASE ROAD
The property rep and the Board discussed the merits and weaknesses of a proposed new home on this site. Ultimately, the Board approved the plan, pending some changes to the dormers. VERDICT: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS