001Okay, green's on, right? Yep. One second. Let me also turn this on. Okay, we are recording. Okay, we're at 7:01 p.m. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and like to welcome each and every one of you here to the town of Winchester Zoning Board of Appeals uh regular meeting for uh June 24th of 2025. Uh held here at the uh Winchester Town Hall, 338 Main Street, uh Winston, Connecticut in the P. Francis Hicks room. Okay. present um tonight with myself, Aubrey English or board members John Pollock, Ryan Horvy, and Ellie Gunn. Okay. Uh absent or uh alternate is member Paul Mitchell, and alternate member Maryanne Marino. Um so for those who've not been before or a board before uh just in a nutshell the way uh these meetings work is that we call your application up
002in front to have you come in front of us. You explain your project. Uh the board will have an opportunity to ask the applicant questions and um and after uh after all questions have been asked at that time I will open up the uh hearing to members of the public uh if they have any comments, concerns or questions that they would have to the applicant. And for parliamentary procedures, I would just ask that any questions, comments uh that any person from the public or anyone else would have would have be directed to the chair and I would make sure they would be distributed out to who needs to be uh who would need to be uh the question needing to go to as well too. Um now unlike most Okay, I'll I'll get to that
003in a second. Uh once the public hearing is done, uh we will give the applicant the opportunity for a final few thoughts is for their application or to the board. Uh at that time, a motion will be read into the record and we will then um continue discussion on the um on your u project. At that time, we will vote on your project and you will get an answer yes or no about having your project tonight. Now that being said, okay, we're we're uh unlike most other boards where unanimous where just majority vote would be uh to have your project uh confirmed by this board, the zoning board of appeals requires a four vote um affirmative. You have to have four affirmative votes. So if we say had five full me or five full members
004here and uh you know three of them was in favor of your project and two of them were not you would still not get your not your project would still not pass due to that rule. It's just been a rule that's been in place here. Now, with all that also being said, as you you can see, as the applicants can see tonight, we only have uh four um people on four board members present tonight, which constitutes a quorum to conduct a meeting. Uh the problem is the well, the issue we run into, you would have to have every single one of us sitting at this dis of us to vote in favor of that. Now with that being said, uh when that when the situation like that happens, we give the applicant an opportunity to
005if you want to continue your application to our next meeting. So we would have more uh a full five uh five uh person uh board present. Uh so you may have an opportunity to maybe have maybe just lose one vote on so or uh you have that option or you can pro you can opt to proceed as as planned and we would just you just have to have each of us on the on this board vote in favor of your project. So again, with each application that's come before tonight, I will give I will start off by giving you the opportunity to decide whether a you want to go forward or b you want to continue to the next meeting due to the uh minimum amount of board members present. So I mean hopefully if
006everyone understands it, if they have any questions I you know for what I said or hopefully I explain myself. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, all that being said, I will call uh first GBA application number 25-6, a variance for 734 Lake Drive. And I believe our applicant and uh representative are present. And if you'd please just identify yourselves for the record. Turn that mic on. Y Oh, yes, please. Thank you very much. We're good. Uh for the record, uh my name is Robert Kella. I am a senior project manager with Haley Ward. And I'd also like to introduce a new employee at our company. This is Jason Craraven. He's also a senior project manager at Haley Ward. And just wanted to bring him to a meeting to show them how we do business here. Mr. Craraven,
007nice to meet you and welcome to our meeting here. We have a have an idea basically kind of what we do here as well too. I don't know if you've been to any other uh town meetings with you like um um Ohio. They do things differently down in Ohio. Do I? I'm from Ohio and they do things a little bit differently, but Oh, I know. I mean, it also depends on which part of Ohio. You get all sorts of uh all sorts of different uh areas of Ohio from like the Great Lakes down to like the Appalachia there. So, um so welcome. Um so, first thing I first thing first thing I ask is, uh Shane, do all our notices everything for this project here? Legal notices and all the um butters have been noticed.
008Thank you so much, sir. Okay. Uh, Mr. Coella, uh, with what I just said earlier, just having a four member board president, would you like to continue now or would you like to continue till next meeting? I'd like to continue for this evening. Yeah. Okay, that'd be fine. Just want to give you that option. Uh, go ahead. Okay. Um, as I mentioned for the record, my name is Robert Kell, senior project manager at Hayden Ward. I'm here today representing the applicants, which are Richard and Carmel Nardella. uh their application is for mostly for yard setbacks uh for it's not a complete removal and replacement. What they're doing with the existing house is removing the second story and rebuilding it in the same footprint, rebuilding the whole second level of the house. and they're taking their
009garage, they're getting rid of the shed that's up in the front of the yard and uh moving the garage from back from so close to the road back to the house. So, if you look at uh your site plan, which is sheet three, sorry, two. So, Right now in the front yard, you'll see in red there's the existing garage and uh about less than 2 ft off the property line there's a shed. Wait, if we need to get you on which sheet two sheet two on the bottom corner. Bottom bottom right corner. Right underneath is the one you're holding. Yeah, that one right there. The bigger one. Yeah, with the green. See anything in red? You see the boxes in red in front of the green? Yeah, I I got them both under here. Yes.
010See in front of it? See the red lines? See it now. Thank you. Uh oh, wait. Wait for Aubrey to get on this one here. Yeah, it's on the large sheet. Sheet two. The first page is existing condition. Okay. So, the front yard uh has a a shed that's about less than 2 ft off the left side yard or west side yard. U and then there's an existing garage in front of the house. uh that is I I think it's let's only existing is it's only 10.61 feet off the road. Uh so what the applicant wants to do is and his biggest problem is that garage in that shed. uh he wants to move the garage further away from the road so he's not backing out into the road blindly and um move this the
011garage back to the house and eliminate the shed completely. So to that end it creates um it takes the existing nonconformance and makes all of them less nonconformed and I'll explain that to you right now. So, the existing right sideyard, that's the sideyard that's got the most room. The uh the existing right sideyard, the existing setback to the garage is 23.37 ft. The proposed setback to the new garage is 26.15 ft. We'll be asking for a variance of 8.85 ft on the right side. on the left side, which is the short side over where the shed is. It's uh existing sideyard set back is 1.79 ft to the shed and we're eliminating the shed and the garage is now 5.31 ft from the sideyard. And they'll be looking for a variance of 29.69 ft on
012the left side or the east side. And then uh the front yard, which is the most complicated of them all, is 10.61 61 ft existing and it's going to be moved back to 39.63 ft. And the variance they'll be looking for there is 10.37 ft. And then if we go to sheet three, I'll discuss impervious coverage. Show you how we're reducing that. So the table is colorcoded for us so it make it a little bit easier for us to look at. existing is up up top and proposed is below. Uh so they're going from the blue that you see on this drawing is all asphalt in both the existing and the proposed situation. The the tan that you see including the garage and the shed and the old existing building there uh that's just garages
013and sheds and that's the brown that you see. The green you see is existing and proposed sidewalks and patios. So, one of the things that this project does that's really good I I believe is one it it decreases the impervious coverage from 48.5% to 43%. So, we're gaining an extra um 5 and a half% of impervious coverage on this project as well. So, in all instances, the left side yards, the right side yard, the front yard, and the impervious cover, the things we're asking for variances for are going from a non-conforming situation to a less non-conforming situation. And the applicant understands that by making it a less non-conforming application, he can never go back the other way. He he per our regulations. So, he can't like for instance, he's got in 40, he's down to
01443% previous coverage. If he decides to do something in the future and decrease that impervious coverage, he can come to the board and ask for that permission. But if he he cannot go over the he can't go back to 48 and a half%. He's not allowed to. Nor can he go back in any of the yards that we're asking for variance for because once again it'll be in the deed and it will be in perpetuity because that's what variances are, right? So, and one of the good things I I liked about this project because I'm always trying to protect the lake is in the on sheet three in the upper left corner of the property, there's catch basin which is currently sitting in the middle of that asphalt. So, water is coming off the asphalt,
015oils and sands and stuff and are going in to that basin. But in the new in the proposed situation, it's going to be in the grass off of the asphalt. So it's no long that catch basin is no longer can be it's going to have filtering before any water gets to it. So it's going to make things a lot cleaner than it was uh before the owner decided to implement this uh project. So, that being said, I I wanted to get into uh my attachment a I'll read into the record. Hey, you all have that in your packet. One of the other things that you have in your packet, one of the other things you have in your packet are letters from each neighbor on both sides of the property that endorsed the property. So,
016I put that in the packet. It was submitted with the application and you should all have a copy. So, attachment A reads that dear members of the zoning board of the field, Haley Ward represents Mr. and Mrs. Ardella. The only you might want to be looking at sheets for you while I talk about this. Um Haley Ward represents Mr. and Mrs. Nardella. The only property known as 734 Lake Drive in Winstead. The property is shown as an improvement location survey prepared by Richard Nardella. 734 Lake Drive, Connecticut. Prepared by Timothy G. Wy. So that's who our surveyor was. The property is in the HL district. The minimum lot area in the district is 40,000 square feet. The minimum lot width is 150 ft. Front yard setback is 50 ft. Minimum side and rear yard setbacks
017are 35 ft. There is also a minimum setback for decks, patios, and pergolgus which are attached to the primary residence of 20 ft. His deck or his patio back there is going to be beyond that 20 foot mark. So he's he's conforming there. Okay. So the Nardella lot is 14,220 ft and has a lot width of 54.1 ft at the street line and 69.4t at the setback line. The existing right and left sideyard setbacks are 23.37 and 1.79 ft respectively. The existing front yard setback is 10.61 ft and the existing rear yard setback is 36.7 ft. The existing imperous coverage is 48 12%. Therefore, the existing lot and structures are all nonconforming. So the Nardella proposed project decreases or matches all nonconformities as follows. The front yard is going from 10.61 ft to 39.62 feet.
018The left side yard's going from 1.79 ft to 5.31. The right side yard is going from 23.37 to 26.15 ft. And the rear yard staying the same because he isn't doing any work back there except taking off the second floor of the structure and building it straight up in the same footprint. the the uh height of the structure when it's completed will be 27 foot 9 in um which is below the 30 foot threshold for the lake which is 35 ft. Okay, Mr. and Miss Now this is where I'm going to start talking about the hardship and why we're here today. Mr. and Mrs. Nardella's property is unique to most properties in the ATL district because the roadway in front of the house is not town owned and the wearing surface of the road is
019not located within the rightway. So if you look at sheet three, you can see the edges of pavement are not within the rightway for that road. They're actually on the lot across the street. So and if you need me to point that out to the site, [Applause] sorry. So this is the edge of pavement and this is the edge of pavement and it's actually the edge of pavement is this line and this line over here. So this is the property line across the street. So part of the road is on that property. So same thing here just in case you this is that line right there is edge edge of pavement. That's the property line. So this asphalt is on there. is not within the rightway. Um, so the you said it was 10 10
020and a half ft to the the ed the um edge of the asphalt, excuse me. What's from from where the existing garage is now to the to where the to the property line? Your setbacks are all related to property lines, right? Right. So the existing one is right here, 10.61 ft to the corner. What I'm asking is how far is that to the fault because in your um description here, part of the um part of the hardship is backing into something blindly, but how far away from it's in there. I'll wait. Okay. Okay. Um, if the wearing surface of the roadway were to be repositioned from private property and placed in the right of way where it should be, the rightway the Nardella's garage would be less than 13.9 ft from the edge of the
021pavement. The average length of this pickup truck is 19 to 21 ft and the average length of the passenger car is about 14.7 ft. So the proposed condition puts him out into the pavement. Now, at any time, the owners may say, "I don't want the liability of having that asphalt on my property. Move that thing into the rightway." If he moves that into the rideway, um he's going to be even closer to to the to the asphalt at that point. So, they can do that at any time. And this makes his property unique in the situation. It isn't anything that he self-created which we know as variance you can't selfcreate your own Can I ask a question about the right of way as a property owner on that right of way doesn't he have some
022ownership of that right of way they all but anybody could well he could get outboarded by everybody and move the property over right so at any point that could happen to him or anybody in the future in perpetuity which would leave I It's not only uh an issue for him backing out of the road. It's an issue for people who are coming up and down the road. If he's only if he's backing out or pulling out forward and you know the rear of his vehicle is out into the asphalt before a car can get he doesn't see them coming. There's a fence on the right, there's bushes on the left, there's the guy next to him has a garage really up close to the to the road. So and and but the road does curve
023away. Left isn't as bad as right looking to the right. He's going to be in a bad situation if that roadway ever gets put to where it's supposed to be. And you know who who did the that was done that was paved a couple of years ago, right? By all the people that live there. Is that correct or you don't know? I don't that that road's quite a bit older than two years. I mean, they put a new paving on it, a new surface on it. It's been done. It's It's like brand new. It's a little bit older than It's more than two years old. I know that. But it doesn't he have a property across the street where he could put a garage and uh because I go for a walk around the lake
024or drive my bicycle around and I never hardly ever see any traffic there and I don't even think Bob um is it Bob or is it Mr. Ardella? M Rich Rich never even lives there in the winter time and I I really don't see how anybody could even back into him. It's you go so slow on that road. Uh you can't speed on it. It's No, I I know you can't speed on it, but he can back into somebody pulling out because he can't see them because his truck is in the road before his eyes hit the road. What's up, Mr. Kell finished presentation have fresh questions? No, you're good. No, you're good. You're good. During our permit determination process with Jeffrey Green's zoning enforcement officer and Jerry Jeremy Darlo in town planner, it was
025determined that a variance would be required for the placement of the garage. It was further suggested that we re review the case of Aden versus the zoning board of appeals of Fairfield um which was decided in Connecticut Supreme Court on December 5th, 1988. The case involved Fairfield ZBA's approval of a less nonconforming use than the previous use in that district/zone and other nonconformities that were being improved upon. The summation of this case was that the ZBA did have the right to approve the variance in absence of a documented hardship if all improvements were less non-conforming than the existing nonconformity. That's been on the record since 1988 and still there today. This would not apply to new construction or conforming lots, which this is not new construction. It's not a con conforming lot. And structures that
026meet or exceed zoning regulations, but in consideration of non-conforming lots and structures that are being improved to be less non-conforming. So, the Nardella's proposed improvements result in the decrease of the existing non-performance. All of the existing nonconform is being the improvements to the property will result in a much less non-conforming lot and structure that would be in character with the surrounding h houses and with our plan our plan of conservation development. No increase to existing non-conformity propos in this instance. It's the same situation. So he has these two things happening here. He has one is the situation with the garage and was wanting to put it back to the house. Now if that garage was attached to the house which it is um we would be here for special exception because the existing garage was
027detached from the house. We need the variance to move that garage back to that location. And in doing so, all of the varants that we require are less nonconforming than the existing nonconformity. And per Adson's case, for instance, it's out of Fairfield, the same rules apply here that apply to that case. Um whereas all of the nonconformities that are existing on this lot are going to be less nonconforming. the improvements to the lot are are are much better than what is there now. Uh and especially that the storm saving the garage across the street is not possible because that's where his well is located and you have separation distance from the well and no matter where he would put that garage across the street on that property, he could not. The well has been there
028since he bought the property. was there before he bought the property and it's so he could not move the garage across the street because that's where his well is and can't move the well onto the other side of the street because no matter where where he puts it on the lot because of the size of the lot, it'll be within the radius of the grinder pump and we don't want which which the health district would not approve of that if we move the well across the street and had it too close to the grinder pump. So, we did look at moving the garage across the street. It didn't work quite as well. And then we looked at different locations on the property to put it and we determined that this was the best location because
029it does two things. We would have centered it a little bit, but we wanted to keep it away from that catch base. So, we kept it to that side as much as we could. It's not really further in the sideyard than the existing building, but it is within the setback. So, we need the variance to move the garage to that location. Um, to that I I mean, other than the neighbors letters, which you have in your packets, uh, if you have any other questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Could you tell me please what is the square footage of the house that he lives in now, including the first floor, second floor, and If he has anything in the basement. No basement. No, he's built on a pad. It's all sl The buildings and
030structures are going to go from existing at 2,119 ft to 2,841. So that's roughly let's ballpark it at 800 or 900 square feet, right? It's uh 7 square feet. So the size of the house will increase by at least that. So it's it's going to be a a bigger house. We're going to be given up pavement and stuff. The bar the house itself isn't going to be I I thought it was mentioned that the second floor of the house was going to be torn down or something was going built safe in the same So, so he's building it in the same gaining gaining square footage looks like over the garage. So, by attaching the garage that that gain is going to be up top. It looks like that's what this is. Yeah, it's what is
031getting bigger. The garage is getting bigger or the house is getting bigger or both of them are getting bigger. Um well the garage is getting the garage is bigger than the garage and shed and it's moved back to that space. Right. Yes. Okay. So my question was how big is the garage going to be now versus what the garage was as it stands now? And is there going to be a floor on that or anything like that? Is it just what was that last? Is there going to be a floor like a second floor on the garage or something like that or stuff like that? I have it. It looks like I have the drawing. I saw from the drawing. They're very They're very uh undetailed to say the least. There's one. So, you're looking
032at because sometimes when people do come in here, uh I've seen much better uh drawings than these look like they're um the drawings are a little hard to see, but they're hard to uh visualize. Uh well, Dantelli is old school and does everything that does everything uh with pencil, right? Um, that's why I was hoping we had the monitor today. There are other drawings in here. Yes. So, this is the garage, right? Yeah. What I'm trying to find out is how big this is going to look. Uh, I I see it on the paper here and you don't really see um there's dimensions on there. There's a view I just So that's the inside, I guess. 36 by 32. There it is. Yeah. 36 by 32. And is that a twocar garage or It's a
033three garage. Three bay garage. I didn't think we were allowed to have three bay garages, but that doesn't make a difference, I guess. Is Is there a reason why why this project has to be so big? because he is relocating here. And the reason he's doing this is because he's bringing all his stuff with him and he doesn't have room to park the cars and he doesn't want to park them on the grass over the catch basins anywhere else. So, uh, and I'm assuming he'll be bringing his boat, but I'm assuming he'll park that across the street because the the thing that bothers me a little bit is I I still don't see the hardship here. Even though you read it over, I I I don't agree with it. And the other thing is um
034this is looks like it's going to be a very big house when he gets done with it and we don't really need very big houses anymore on the lake. If you look at the waterfalling and stuff like that, how the leaves are coming up this year, it's it's pretty sad. If we keep building like this, somebody down the street's going to have the same old idea. Let's tear down part of the house, make it a little bit bigger, and uh let's pick up some patio blocks that reduce the impervious service and per service. Just twist those numbers around and then uh we'll get it past the zoning board. I am always when I design anything around the lake, I always make it as least conforming as I possibly and I've done it in this instance
035as well. Um, and this is just pretty big house here. Well, if you look at your your sheets, sheet three of my plan, sheet two of my plan. You can see the house in red superimposed over the house. We don't have that red. It's hard to see on our side. Huh. Right. Oh, okay. That's the red lines there. Yeah. So, that's the original house following the same exact line. Yeah. And then this is the bump out. This is gone. And then this is where the garage takes over for this area. So the only this is basically moving from the only increase he had on this whole this little rectangle right here. This is all conforming. He's just bumping out the kitchen a little bit. And that's the only increase he's having in the house. And
036the difference in between this and this taking up all this space is being moved back to here. He hasn't increased it by that much at all. Um I mean like I say this rectangle right here. So this is the existing footprint of the house all the way around. So he's got all of that second floor is coming up. He needed this. The architect said he needed this space to do make a corner here with a duct or something. Um this is all conforming this little bump out meets all the front side. It's in that triangle which is what's left. So really the increase in the house is only about two or 16. Yes, it really isn't increasing the size of that house by much. And the garage increase is less than 20%. Any questions from
037the board? If there's two, right? There's one in in the road and then there's one in the driveway. Is there anything for So you had mentioned the second one will be in the grass which is Yeah, we're he's not touching those storm stories. So it stay it maintains. Yeah, Jim wouldn't want. So this doesn't change anything other than the location being in the ground. We're not even changing location. It's staying there asphalt that's around it. It's sending whatever can come off the asphalt into that. So that any other questions okay there's none at the moment. Um I will open the hearing to any members of the public who wish to speak in uh as to this application. Do we have any members pres of the public present here who wish to speak to this application?
038Any members of the public who wish to speak to this application? Any members of the public who wish to speak to this application? Hearing none, um I will uh read into the record very briefly the two following letters from uh the neighbors. Um the first one is states uh hello GBA members. I have reviewed the improvements to Richard and uh Carmel Nardella's property at 734 Lake Drive and take no exception respectfully and I hope I'm pronouncing all the right. Elizabeth Saut, thank you. Uh 736 Lake Drive, Winston, Connecticut 06098. Uh second letter. Hello ZBA members. I've reviewed the improvements to Richard and Carmel Nardella's property at 734 Lake Drive and take no exception respectfully. Is it It's attorney John Fl. I'm sorry. John Flurry. John Flurry because I'm sing I'm seeing an old Dell or
039something. Oh, no. I'm on 602. I'm doing four this week. Sorry. I'm I'm up on East Wakefield Boulevard right now. We want to take a look and see which one we're talking about the same person. Odell. Odell. What's the first name? You know, is it a Kira or Kyra or Ken? Kyle. Kyle, maybe. And if these neighbors are listening, I'm botching their names. Please accept my apologies. Okay. Uh, address 7:32 Lake Drive, Winston, Connecticut. Um, those being read into the record as public as comments as far as a public hearing. I'm going have Do we have one more? Do we have any members of the public who wish to speak to this application hearing? None. I will close the public. You were going to give me a chance for closing. I'm closing the public forum.
040Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. I thought you were closing the public hearing. I thought you were going to say public hearing. Sorry. I'm closing the public comments. It's okay. So, at this time, I'll close public comments to this application. And Mr. Calibell, I'd be happy to give you the last word. Right. So, I understand John's apprehension. Um however in this case there is true hardship with those and and if that the road does get move in the future and it has the potent um there there is a sight distance issue there. That's something that's unique to the property that he did not create. It was there when he bought the property and it's still there and they've made no other changes to the property. Um they keep this property exceptionally well, exceptionally well. And um the
041Adolf case allows the zoning board of appeals to approve uh a variance for application. This came from Jeremy de Carly, which is current time. the ability to pro approve the application if the application decreases all nonconformities that you're asking for variance for and in this case and and does that you could do and it allows the ZBA to do that without a documented parture and that's what the case was all about and you read about it anytime you want I was Jeremy made me aware of it and we um read through the the case and this is exactly the summary of the case that as long as you're making all of the nonconformities less nonconforming, the ZVA board of the town of Fairfield was able to approve that hardship uh without a documented approved that
042variance without a documented hardship. went all the way to the state supreme court in 1988 and the case still stands. So we do have a documented hardship. We also are asking for variance under both the documented hard hardship and the verse conclusions in the se 19 December of uh supreme court ruling. So everything he's doing here is making it less non-conforming. And the one thing I did want to show you is Oh, I don't have the screen. I really tied my arms without having the screen. And I I wanted to show you um truthfully exactly how clean and neat the Nardellas keep their property. One of the better things that we see here that Maryanne likes to talk about. So yeah, I'm very familiar with the problem. I just want to show you. Okay. Why
043don't you see? Yes. Good. Because I look at it like we're supposed to. So the It's I'm not familiar with it at all. So, it's a So, at the road, what I want to show you is over here at the front at So, over here at at the wall where Marian always talks about and I I agree with that and I like it. But what he did, he has it's six feet wide. It is also um about 8 ft deep and is filled with filter fabric. the whole thing and filled with fresh stone. So, the roof leaders are going to be going into that and one I even have a calculation uh on drawings that show that it can handle the full 1.3 in of water coming off of the roof that is required. So,
044to that end, you know, I was now I don't know if close the public hearing or why you should keep it open and wait for five. Um, but I think the Nardellas have a project here that really is building's not getting any taller. It's only got like 16 square ft of additional built house space. Uh, the garage is going to be much better served by moving it back, attaching it to the building. Only reason it's a little bit bigger because he has going to be moving here and he's bringing all his vehicles with him. Right now they the whole front is like covered with asphalt. They come in and they park behind that other garage. Um so all of this will clean up the property nicely. Give us you know little less impervious coverage on
045a lot that's really at like 48 and a half% you know so just reducing it 5 and a half% is a big jump. and additionally moving it away from that catch basin. So, we're hoping to stand on all of the non-conformities being less non-conforming, which would not require you to prove this um in the would would allow you to approve this in the absence of a documented hardship. Although, we have presented a documented hardship here today. So, with that, I'm all set. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kabella. Um, I will go ahead and close the uh hearing of this application and read the following motion into the record. Motion to grant variances per section 3D5C of the zoning regulations for application ZBA number 25-6. Remove the existing garage and shed. Build garage in new location. Westside
046yard set back 29.69 inches. Southside yard set back 8.85 inches and a 20 inches or feet. Um, if I am I read Am I reading this right? Feet or inches? Feet. What? The west side feet. Okay. I just want to make sure I'm safe. Westard yard set back 29.69 feet. Southside yard setback 8.85 85 ft and a 28 correction front yard set back 10.37 ft and an 28% increase in imperous co coverage. Uh at 734 Lake Drive, Winstead, Connecticut. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Uh discussion amongst the board members. Okay. um while we have discussion. I mean, well, I look like you want to I did well because I was asking about um the right of way in the road and that being the hardship portion of
047this thing, but then coming back and saying what Fairfield did kind of negates that. Well, it doesn't really negate it. I still want to implore you that the hardship exists, but it it allows you to approve it without a documented hardship. But I am documenting the one hardship that he has and the reason he's moving that garage from point A to point B. So especially if he's backing out with his with a 19T truck 13 ft off the asphalt, you know, so you don't even get out of the garage and the rear of the truck is in the would be in No, I understand that. and was just confirming that whole dialogue. That's all. Ryan, did you have something? Well, I was just looking at the the existing versus proposed, right? It's in the to
048John's point about the the structure size, we're still making everything less non-conforming with approving it. So if we, you know, and I whether asphalt into the catch basin is worse than gutter leaders into a stone basin, you know, I'm kind of leaning towards the, you know, going to that 43% versus a 48 and a half without being able to capture the water better. I think it's a better impact. Just I'm I'm going through the whole thing in my head, right? Like it's It's cleaner. It's cleaner without the asphalt and the water that the stone I there's a calculation on sheet three. the so what I did for calculating that area I took the the amount of stone that was there and I took out the level of the lake and I what was left was
049how much stone was above the lake and how much water it can receive the void can receive. So got the math from what the void ratio is for that size stone which is a very uniform size stone by the way and it handles more than 1.3 in of rainfall. The first 1.3 inches of rainfall from the roof, but it's really good system that he he has down there. Not only can the water not get past the first barrier, which is a stone bar, a stone cobblestone barrier, and would have to go up and over that and then get into that stone and fill those voids before it starts dropping down into the water. And it's recharging the water. It's not sending water directly into the lake. And even if it just per say It can't
050happen. But just per say all that stone was to get filled with silt or something, but there's no silts coming off the ground. So, um, if all that stone was to get filled with silt or something, it still has to make it over the capstones, which is another jump for the water. So, there's no way the water is not going to get reached. It's going to get discharged and recharged before it goes into the lake without bringing any delotterious matter with it. And I'm going to throw this out there too. Um, as far as the hardship, um, not dismissing anything that you know your your concerns as well, John, or anyone else's concerns either, but you know, and and I I I can understand if there's very little traffic on um on uh West Lake
051Drive there, too. I'm worried about pedestrian traffic. Well, that this is this is this is where this is what I'm getting. This is what I'm getting at. It can It does concern me that the fact that a vehicle can stretch out into the roadway and even if there's not that much vehicle traffic, it takes one to have any type of incident that you know could could uh um impact you know the property owner's vehicle or a person passing by there too. Um and the fact that you know Mr. Kyle Biff said that the applicant is relocating there. It seems to be in a more full-time basis. Am I correct? Yes, he's retired. Okay. His wife, you know, he wants he wants he wants to make it to where, you know, that's not an issue. Um,
052you know, I I can I can see where the hardship currently exists as far as that goes. And, you know, for that, I think that's something I think the board should definitely would take into consideration too when making this decision. And like John said and Ryan said, they walk that way. Yeah. And I'm I'm actually when I think about this, because I wrote not only vehicular, but I wrote pedestrian traffic, too. I think it would even be harder to see a pedestrian or a dog or somebody walking their dog or whatever than it is to, you know, maybe catch a glimmer of a vehicle because the sun hit the windshield or something. But I still think it's a dangerous situation. But doing this, he's proving that the ha the hazard appears to be there. So
053in my opinion, so yeah. So do we have any other discussion on this application? Okay. Uh with that, I will call for a vote on ZBA25-6. All in favor? All oppose? I have to oppose it. I'm sorry. All right. So what recommendations you want for us to come back? My problem is you you're building like seven. you're just building too much uh 700 or 25 ft. Uh if it was a lot less or smaller, I could possibly see that in the garages. The garage doesn't have to be this big. This is going to set a bad precedent. I I just I I think it's a good idea, but I just can't vote on it. It's going to have a ripple effect throughout the whole lake and we're going to see more and more people coming
054in having bigger requests to build more a bigger garage have this on and everything else like that and it's just if if you do you ever go down to the lake you ever go swimming or anything like that? Yeah. Okay. Do you see all the weeds that are in the lake now? There's tons of them. I pull them out every day. Okay. And the lake is not going to be getting any better with all this development. And there's tons of boats on the lake now and everything else. He's reduced everything. I know he's made it less less. I know by the numbers I know that of a hazard to the water than it is now. Now it's going to remain, you know. Well, I understand about I I I know it's all numbers and I
055just I just can't see the the huge development. I just can't I'm sorry. But I think we got to take that and we have to take that personal belief off of it, right? We have an inland wetlands department. Inland wetlands is going to review this if they haven't already, right? They're the ones that are making the decisions on what the impact is on the water. Mhm. So, we're not looking at the style of the house. We're not looking at what its actual impact is on the lake. We're looking at the existing and the proposed and making a decision based on the reasoning behind doing it. That's what we need to make our decision on. And then we need to rely on the wetlands group to make the decision to fix the problem that you're speaking
056of. So I I do I agree that that's the problem that I'm speaking of. Well, you the house size, right? That's correct. But I don't know how the house size I don't know how the wetlands would have anything to do with the size of the house. I thought it was the zoning board or the planning board, but I don't know how that affects the lake, I guess, is my question. Okay. You probably have a bigger house and then you probably have more rain coming off the roof and going into the lake and stuff like that. Uh it does have an effect on it. Well, I'm looking at the total impervious, right? I I know that impervious whether it's a roof or asphalt, right? And those are all numbers. Yes. That's all I'm saying. I I
057can't explain it anymore. Those numbers define, right? Those numbers def define that we would be capturing all of the water before it entered the lake. I'm going to ask something unprecedented. Are you standing by your vote or do you wish? Yes, I stand. I'm staying by my vote. I'm sorry. Okay. I Mr. Cal, I apologize. Unfortunately, it's project. That's first for me, but that's okay. Um I we'll be back. We'll see you then. Um what would help John? I'm just saying that if the things are a little bit smaller, that's really bothering me. Bigger and bigger and bigger, we could maybe have it half the size or something like that. Maybe just 300 more. You know, you know, I mean, I just I mean, I'm I don't know. I mean, I don't understand if you
058if if you just like the way it used to be or the way the lake if you don't like the fact that people are trying to come into our community, if you don't like the fact that people are, you know, building on here. I mean, I I don't think people are purposely trying to, you know, make this a a conglomerate big, you know, metrop metropolis on the lake that these are people want to be here. I'm just throwing that out there. Okay. Second. I see it a little differently. Can I ask a question? Um, I mean, you can close this, but I do have a question. Uh, yeah. Well, we we Yeah, since he's not going to We'll go ahead. The the application is complete. I guess my question pertains to us as the board.
059The president that was in Fairfield, do we have an obligation to stand by that? There it is. What they're doing by doing that is is is saying that there is legal precedent on that there. It's basically I'm I'm understanding that is if he were to they would use that and they come back and they quote get an attorney. The attorney is going to come to us and say you have to approve it based on this. That's my question. Does that open us up to a liability because we didn't have that precedent? Yeah. Do you see what I'm asking? Yes. Does it make sense or is that a goofy question? No, I don't know. I don't know if there's if that does. I mean, I Wait, we we need we need to move on. All right.
060Well, maybe we can find out some They're aware, Richie. It's not. It's We'll be back next We'll be back next month. So, we'll have to just make a couple changes and we'll be back. All right. Okay. A second here. So, this Yes. Thank you, sir. Have a great night. Good to meet you, too. Look forward to seeing you again. Yep. Okay. Um, moving on to ZBA 25-7, the variance located 224 Torrenford Street. proposal build a two 20 foot x 16 ft shed with a 20 foot x 18 foot lean to with a front yard setback of 33.7. The applicant want to um [Applause] and good evening. if you want to uh uh state your name and have uh super unique for me. Sorry, I apologize. So if I got that, but yes. So my name
061is Kevin Tealing. I'm the property owner along with my wife at that 224th Street. Okay, Mr. Ke, uh why don't you go ahead and tell us about your project, sir. Um before well, before we'll housekeeping, I quickly do all notices have been notices and the joiner's notice. Okay. And again, Mr. feeling like I did with the last applicant. I'm going to give you the opportunity. If you want to proceed with your application, you may do so with the understanding you have to have the all all members present voting in favor. Uh you have the option to if you want to continue this to the next meeting and hopefully we'll have five all five members there. Uh you can do that. That's up to you. I'm sorry. So still if there was five members and I
062had four votes. Yay. Correct. Passes. That's the rules need for that. Clarify. That's that's correct. Regardless, I gonna continue. You want to proceed tonight? Fantastic. Go ahead. You might want to go ahead proceed. All right. So, I have a a piece of property. We live up on Torian for street. Um, just consider, you know, it's right down the foot street. It's on the right side. My house goes between the road and route 8. So, that's where I kind of orient you. Um, steep little area. I have a current sh uh shed. It's located on the right side of the shed. It's indicated on this map. Uh, it's 8 by 12. So, it's a freestanding accessory building. My goal is to increase it. Now I if I'm correct, I think a 200 square foot uh building
063an accessory building can be put on the property. Is that true? Yeah, it it can be over 200 square feet. It just changes the permitting process. Change the permanent process. So um I wanted to replace the shed. So I'm going to increase the shed would like to increase the shed by 16 by 20 um in that area. And then on the kind of the far side away from you as you're viewing the print is a lean to. So it's a 8 by 20 foot lean to on the side. So, it's open air on that side. So, I'm just removing the existing shed and then uh replacing it with this larger um structure, a little barn. So, a little posted beam thing. Um just fun note or something like that. I'm harvesting the wood off the
064property and I was going to plan on hopefully using that too. So, it's all native. So, which is kind of cool. Anyways, my hardship that I'm asking for, my variance I'm asking for is that um I have and I should have included and I apologize for that and I was I have a topography map here that probably would have made a lot more sense um that was drawn. I should have shared it with you and I apologize because now I realize um but the topography of my land is quite a slope. So I do have one area where the house sits, comes down steep, levels off and then goes back steep again. So the area in which this all my current structures are on or on that piece that piece if I move away from
065it down toward my septic field um it drops off precipitously. So it makes it more difficult to even put a structure there and the amount of fill and everything else that would go into this. So that that's what my hardship. The other piece is that um on this piece there on your plan there's a little small little water here and we've never gone near it or anything. It's was there when the property and the walls owned it when it was way back. I guess it was an old horse piece, but it's a a little pond over in the area. We call it a pond. So, I'm concerned about wetlands. I've never had it, you know, or any concerns when we built the house in this. So, the other hardship would be moving into that. I
066do not want to impact anything that's potential water area, watershed area. Does that make sense? Um, so that's it in a nutshell. That's all I have. And I do have elevation plans of what this is. So, it's not a it's again it's just a shed where I do my wood chop. If there is no objection from the board, I would uh I would I will go ahead and if there's any is there any objection to allowing that topography map to be included if anyone wants to see it as far as uh anything you can just I drove I drove by. You can tell you can see pretty clearly where the driveway today. Okay. Just just in case if anyone had any questions or anything as well. The only question that that I have going into
067it is, you know, based off of the survey, you know, that pond is there and it's, you know, using the the scale, it's about 80 ft. Did Jeff review this? Did he give it an agent approval or does it um Jeff I mean, he reviewed it. I have both of them review, but because within 100 feet, right, it should have wetlands or an agent approval on um I don't think we spoke of that. There you had a shed here already, correct? I'm just wondering why the front yard setback says existing 126.6 because you had something right there was just a little smaller. Correct. Yes. Yeah, it's indicated on it should be on that. I don't see it. I don't see it. Oh boy. All right. So, so that footage I'm wondering if that front yard
068you can see the dotted line but yeah this one shows a little existing and then the existing shed right does it does anything have that I just don't want it to turn you know if Jeff could have give it is it sonitude I mean he has certainly looked at the plan so he would need to just give it an agent approval prior to or question for you so um I was going to reach And I when I looked at these barns at those what a barnyard or whatever they said I can have a structure this big on gravel. Is that true? I did that. I don't know. I don't know though. Um according to the building codes that's what they told me and I could run that. So if if that was the case I
069if I got past the the footprint and the ability to do this here I was going to ask put it on a gravel pad eliminating the solitude. Yeah. That'd be a building official question I'd have to ask. But that's what they told me at the barnyard that you would have one of these on on. Yeah, but that'd be a building official question. I'd have to look into that because the way the way it drops off that whole as soon as you go down to that lower area or the area it's all wet. I have some lawn trying to grow there in my, you know, that works out that well. Do we have any other questions? Um, was there any problems with your neighbors or anything like that that wasn't mentioned with with you doing the
070project? Um, there was confusion on one side. One of my neighbors thought that I was trying to annex his property. He thought I was trying to take that away. That if you if you know historically to foot street used to have a garage right there at my property if you driven by it. There's an old stone foundation there. Y and we had talked about that in the past that that's an historical he thought I wanted that building. Um so that was his confusion. We cleared that up. My other neighbor, she was concerned that the variance was on her property. Yes. Um and that was the discussion I had with her. I said the variance is on my property. You know, reducing my setback, you know, where that is. And you know, further discussion with her
071too is well is just again, you know, that's really it's a slopey area. I don't even know how we'd ever, you know, put a house there. And um and this is my little the little shed that's there was there 27 eight years ago and kind of built it. It needs it's a disrepair. Needs so we're not increasing the front is staying the same. See that? Yep. The point of the old uh barn stays the same distance as well. That was my uh So, I'm not getting any farther into that current area if that's what you're referring to. Yeah. It's just weird like like Shane pointed out, it it says existing is 126t 6 in with the proposal down to 16'3. So it just but then it the math doesn't even really work for like if
072they were using toring for street the 120 ft back from the road plus adding that 16 ft. That's what I was trying to understand what the existing versus the other one is. Did that answer your question at all? anything. Yeah, I don't have any I mean I'm going to I don't see any reason to not put it right where it is. My only concern is that somebody comes back at later on with the wetlands part of it or if something happens with that. So I would just recommend that if there's something tied to that at some point and I was trying to understand what I mean you know you can certainly make that as a special condition. I would Jeff approves it through. Do we have any other questions from the board? Okay, hearing none
073at the moment. Uh I will go ahead and open the public uh public forum uh comment to this meeting. Do we have any members of the public who wish to speak to this application? Seeing shaking heads, I'll go ahead and ask any members of the public who wish to speak to this application. Any members of the public wish to speak to this application? Hearing none uh I will and seeing no uh correspondence from neighbors I will go ahead and close the public portion public comment portion of this application and Mr. Fielding I'll give you the uh final final word. Um again thank you very much for taking your time tonight to to sit and uh listen to my my little proposal if you will. Um like I said the the very the hardship is is
074just what I said. You know it's it's a slope and it's pretty significant. Um, so anywhere in there just makes it, you know, I would have to build in all this fill and everything else to even make it a usable barn at this point. So I was fortunate enough that most people when they drive by, they say, "Oh, you live on the cliff. I even have to put a house down there." So, um, but we've carved out a little piece of a little property down there and made it level enough. So, um, but that's, you know, what I want to bring to you guys. So, thank you again for your time. Thank you, sir. Um, before I read the motion, did we want to add a uh did we want to add a condition or
075some or special condition? Just that Jeff either gives it an agent approval or pushes it to uh wetlands and that that for the sauna tubes in the So we just read the motion and be pending agent approval is that I I don't know how the leg So would that be just if there were sauna tubes? Is that or it's building in with I mean it's doing within and I don't know the I don't know the footage right without the surveyor showing it right just for my uh education. So is that because they're the sonnet tubes inside a wetland is that what well anything any disturbance of the ground within the wetlands area. So even if you were to level it out you know if they're bringing a machine in there or something should have something.
076Now, if Jeff looked at the property, if he walked out there and said, "This is completely bone dry and there's not going to affect this at all until it gets to here," then I think Jeff has the right to just say, "Give you the stamp of approval." That's all I would ask for just so it doesn't turn ugly at some point later on. Yeah. I mean, you can put at inland woodland agent approval or or determination and see if where he wants to go with that. So just say pending pending inland wetland agent approval. Yeah. Or inland wetland agent approval slash agent approval. Okay. As well make sure the language is is any other input as far as this. Okay. Let me just write this. So I can add another is that another gentleman. I
077don't that'll be Jeff. It'll be the same same building official. No, this will be our inland wetland agent Jeff. So I'll speak to him. He he's actually not in the office tomorrow. So I'll speak to him on Thursday. Okay. So the motion as now will read motion to grant variance per section 3D D5C of the zoning regulations for application ZBA2-7. Build a 20 foot x 16 foot shed with a 20 foot by 8 foot lean to with a front yard set of 33.7 foot pending inland wetland agent approval on property of two of 224 Towingford Street Winchester Connecticut. Is there a second? I second it. Okay. Ryan second it. Okay. Okay. Uh, any further discussion? Any further discussion? Okay. Uh, all in favor of this application? Opposed? Abstain. Mr. Keing, you have your project. Thank
078you very much. Thank you. One of those just to protect you from that makes sense. You know, that's part of the the piece. We don't want to get We don't really want to get into that area. So I'll speak to both chap in the building if I want to speak to you at the end of the week. Okay. Okay. I will post that question too. Yeah. Yeah. I'll find all that out. Okay. All right. Cleanly. Uh let's see. Next on the agenda is the approval of the uh minutes of the meeting for May 27th, 2025. You guys have an opportunity, excuse me, to look them over? Yes. Do we have any additions, corrections? I I don't think I was there at the meeting so I can't abstain one typo. There's a T missing off a
079word but ask me where it was. I think so. But in spirit it was there. The thought was we can postpone the approval of the minutes till we get some of the other people. No, but I mean if we want to wait till we have more people who Well, I think the majority of the people who were who were at last month's meeting is sitting here on the board too. And I mean if Well, Maryanne and Paul aren't here and John was not here. Okay. Do you want do you want to just postpone the approval till the next meeting? See if they're here. I would say is there a any any objection to that? No. No. Okay. With no objection, we'll go ahead and uh uh we will uh table the approval of the main
080meeting till next meeting uh pending more members present. Okay. Do we have to use the four people rule for minutes or can it be a majority? No, I I I think it for for that it's a majority and three of us would constitute a majority if we all voted that way. Okay. I mean, well, so do you want me to put this back on the I mean, well, I asked the question. I just like everybody to get to look at them to see if they have any corrections that they want to make, but do you want to I mean, do I mean I mean, I'll open the question back up. I mean, do we want to do you want to approve the minutes now or do you want to wait till we have uh uh
081I personally think three of us I mean, if we have three of us that vote for it, that's a majority and it would be dispensed with. I read them. I thought everything was there. Okay. Uh thoughts on that? Ryan, Ryan, do you want to you want to vote on it now or do you want to wait till the next meeting? I don't see anything that stands out to me. So, I'm good with now. Sure. Okay. So, I'll reopen the question then. Uh approval of the May 27th, 2025 uh uh GBA meeting. Uh so moved. Motion's been made and second. Second Ryan second. Any discussion? All in favor of approval of the minutes? All opposed? Any abstensions? John stains. Okay. Uh minutes are passed. Okay. Um any new business? No. Come foremost. Okay. Push that off
082again, too. Huh? Push that off again also. Um we might want to um old business. We um we need to name I guess a couple new officers um that it's been kind of like a couple months in the uh the making here. Our vice president uh stepped down. Who's that? Ron. Ron Doo. Yes. Ron Doo. He stepped down. Yeah. Yeah. I know. Yes. Um yes. So we will meet a uh a new vice president for his for his spot. Um I will entertain any nominations for vice president. I I do think we need to wait for more of the board. I think that I would agree with that. You want to do you want to We should have a five. Okay. So, we will table if consensus right now is we table the naming of
083new officers till the next meeting with the hope that we have more members present. As such, we'll go ahead and table the uh table the uh the old business till next month. Any other old business? No. Okay. Any correspondence since this came out? No. Okay. Um any anything from our members tonight before we adjourn? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Ryan moved. Ellie second. Any discussion? Hearing none. All in favor. All oppose. We are journ. Okay. So, we should hang on to our uh all of our wishing my mind. Not that picture.