Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Stratford board continues hearing on variance request to add second-floor over existing garage at 10 First Street
Loading...
Summary
The Town of Stratford Board of Appeals continued the public hearing on Avery Molnar’s request for variances to build living space above an existing garage at 10 First Street so the town attorney can advise whether the house’s deterioration qualifies as a hardship under the zoning rules.
The Town of Stratford Board of Appeals on the record continued a public hearing on a petition from Avery Molnar seeking a site-plan review and variances of sections 3.2.1(c) and 6.1.36 to allow a second-floor addition above an existing attached garage at 10 First Street.
The continued hearing matters because the petitioner is asking the board to allow living space to be located 5 feet from the side-yard property line rather than the 10-foot principal-structure setback required by the RS-4 zoning standards, and the board asked for the town attorney’s legal guidance on whether the condition of the existing house constitutes the kind of “hardship” the regulations permit.
Attorney Barry Knott, representing the applicant, told the board the existing garage sits five feet from the side yard and the proposed second-floor master bedroom would be within that same 5-foot envelope, which triggers the variance request. Knott said the home sits on an 80-foot-wide, 120-foot-deep lot (9,600 square feet) and that renovation costs are about $950,000 versus a current assessed market value of about $274,700. “The cost to renovate this house, pursuant to the plans that are before you tonight as an exhibit, is approximately $950,000,” Knott said.
Knott described the claimed hardship as the long-term deterioration of the structure while it was occupied by the applicant’s late mother, who he said was incapacitated by illness and could not maintain the house; he argued that those conditions were specific to this parcel and were not caused by the current applicant.
Architect Daniel Pato explained that the project keeps the existing footprint but adds living space above the attached garage, which under the zoning rules changes the setback requirement for living space and therefore requires relief. Board members asked whether the second-floor space must extend to the current garage edge and whether the same effects on neighbors would result if the addition sat 10 feet from the line; Knott and Pato responded that the current design requires the 5-foot condition for the master suite design and said the visual and value impacts would be similar if the second floor were placed farther in.
Neighbor Christine Velasquez, who lives on the corner lot adjacent to the Molnar property, testified in opposition, saying the proposed second floor would look “directly down into my backyard, and I have 0 privacy,” and that the addition could reduce her property value and enjoyment of her backyard. Knott offered a rebuttal, saying the objection did not account for the change from a deteriorated house to the renovated structure and that sightlines would exist whether the second floor started at 5 feet or 10 feet.
Because board members identified a question of law — whether the deterioration of a structure, rather than an inherent land condition, can constitute a qualifying hardship under the zoning regulations — the board voted to keep the public hearing open and continue the matter to the next scheduled meeting so the town attorney (identified in the record as Attorney Florek) could provide an opinion. The board took a voice vote to continue the hearing; the record shows the board approved the continuance by voice vote, and the hearing will be resumed at the next meeting for which the applicant will be re-notified.
The record for this petition includes the exhibit photos, the site plan showing the existing and proposed footprints, and architectural 3-D renderings supplied by Pato Architects.
