Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance Floodplain Storage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milford board approves outdoor storage variance at 354 North Street with flood-condition
Summary
The Milford Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance allowing outdoor storage at 354 North Street but required that stored equipment be brought indoors when a flood is forecast. The applicant said units would be moved into the warehouse during predicted storms; the board pressed for protections against flash floods and future owners.
The Milford Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 12 approved a variance allowing outdoor storage of equipment at 354 North Street, subject to a condition that any outdoor items be moved inside when a flood is forecast. The board voted unanimously to approve the request after hearing technical details and flood‑risk concerns.
The application sought relief under the city zoning code to expand a preexisting nonconforming warehouse use to permit outdoor storage of HVAC and other equipment. Attorney Kevin Kersay, representing the applicant, said the company’s plan is to “remove those, and put them into the warehouse during a predicted storm event.” He told the board the property is located in the FEMA SFHA AE flood zone and that the proposed dry flood‑proofing plan builds on procedures the applicant already rehearses.
The board’s discussion emphasized two recurring points: (1) how the stored units would be protected in a sudden “flash” flood versus a forecasted storm and (2) how a variance that “runs with the land” could affect future owners. Members noted the applicant’s plan relies on moving heavy units indoors and that elevating units was not addressed because of weight and safety concerns.
Kersay presented prior zoning documentation to support a legal hardship claim, including a certificate of zoning compliance recorded in 2010 and a prior zoning certification dating to 1994, and argued the warehouse use predated the current R‑18 zoning. He told the board the lot is largely in a floodplain and bordered by wetlands and the Wepawaug River, which he said limits feasible options for additional indoor storage.
Board members pressed the applicant on short‑notice flood events and the possibility of future owners not following the plan. The board resolved that the variance approval would include a condition requiring all outdoor storage to be moved inside “when a flood is coming,” language the board inserted into the motion. The board also discussed that additional conditions could be added later by the Planning & Zoning Board if site plan review were required.
The motion to approve the variance included references to Milford code sections governing expansion of nonconforming uses and outdoor storage and cited the applicant’s flood‑procedures plan as the operative mitigation. The vote was recorded in favor by Board members King, Sota, DuBois, Hirsch and Chairwoman Ferrante, with Commissioners Montano and Wolf excused.
The board closed the public hearing and approved the variance with the flood‑notification condition. The approval leaves open how enforcement would operate in practice and whether future owners would adhere to the flood procedures; those implementation details were not resolved at the hearing.
Key next steps: the applicant will be expected to follow the dry flood‑proofing and storm‑response procedures described to the board; any required coastal site plan or planning approvals would be resolved in subsequent hearings if necessary.
