Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetland Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation commission recommends ZBA approve 26-inch wetland setback encroachment with containment condition
Summary
Manchester Conservation Commission voted to recommend that the Zoning Board of Adjustment approve a variance allowing an existing shed at 82 Katinka Drive to remain 22 feet 10 inches from the wetland edge, conditioned on installation of a 3-inch minimum impervious containment tray inside the shed.
The Manchester Conservation Commission on May 22 recommended that the Zoning Board of Adjustment approve variance application ZBA 2025-044 to allow an existing shed at 82 Katinka Drive to remain inside the 25-foot wetland setback.
The commission’s recommendation came after a presentation by Nick Cartarelli of Redwood Builders, who said the shed was permitted and inspected in 2014 but sits at 22 feet 10 inches from the wetland edge — 26 inches inside the setback. Cartarelli told the commission the owners hired Redwood Builders to handle permitting and that moving the shed would be costly, estimating moves could run “thousands of dollars.”
Commissioners asked about the shed’s use, foundation and any signs of erosion. Cartarelli described the structure as a wooden shed on a fieldstone pad used for typical yard equipment and said he observed no settlement or erosion near the structure. Commission members pressed for pollution-prevention measures, noting sheds sometimes store fuels, pesticides or other materials that could leach into the wetland.
Chair (unnamed) proposed a condition that the owner install an impervious containment tray on the shed floor to capture any spilled materials. Commissioners refined the language to require a containment tray with a minimum 3-inch perimeter wall. The motion to recommend approval with that condition passed by voice vote, recorded as 4 in favor and 1 opposed.
The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, which has authority to grant the variance. The commission noted the shed had a 2014 building permit and a final inspection in November 2014 but that there was no on-site verification showing the structure was built slightly inside the shown setback. The commission did not direct moving the shed; it recorded the cost and potential utility disruption as factors in members’ deliberations.
The commission made clear the difference between discussion and formal action: its vote was a recommendation to the ZBA, not a permit grant. The ZBA will make the final decision in its proceedings.
The commission closed the item after asking Cartarelli to state his last name for the minutes.
