ZBA continues public hearing on 995 South Avenue redevelopment after extensive neighborhood concerns

The New Canaan Zoning Board of Appeals continued the public hearing May 5 on a proposed redevelopment of 995 South Avenue, asking the applicant for additional information after extensive presentations and public comment.

Attorney Andre Gomes, representing 995 South LLC, asked the board to continue the hearing to the June meeting so his team could supply further materials; the board agreed to continue the matter. The proposal calls for demolition of two deteriorating, legally nonconforming structures and construction of two new buildings: a single‑family home and a two‑family building (three units total) on a 1.1‑acre site that straddles a steep slope and wetlands.

Gomes told the board the applicant sought to reduce existing nonconformities and eliminate a height nonconformity on the northerly structure. He described the plan revisions made after an earlier withdrawn application in late 2024, saying the latest design moves both buildings farther from the street and lowers or eliminates height nonconformities while adding a “robust stormwater management system” and septic upgrades to meet public‑health rules.

Project engineers said the parcel’s topography and subsurface conditions constrain where a septic system and stormwater controls can be placed. Engineer Justin Girolando said the site’s steepest slopes occupy a central strip of the property and that meeting setbacks for two separate septic systems, required stormwater controls and retaining walls pushed building footprints toward the front of the lot. Girolando testified the plan requires roughly 500 feet of retaining walls, and that about 47% of the site’s buildable area is the stream and a 25‑foot buffer while another 38% is effectively reserved for septic and related infrastructure.

Gomes presented a zoning table and calculations showing the applicant reduced prior proposed encroachments: the northerly building would be 22.2 feet from the front property line (revised from an earlier plan of 20.3 ft and from an existing 18.8 ft) and the southerly building would be moved to 28.1 feet from the front line (previously 21.7 ft). He said existing total building coverage is 2,962 square feet and proposed coverage is 3,615 sq ft; the applicant reported a net increase of 374 sq ft within the front setback area compared with the November scheme but said the proposal reduces or eliminates other nonconformities and includes substantial mitigation.

Board members pressed the applicant for market and site‑use analysis showing that rebuilding only in the existing footprints would be impractical. Counsel and the applicant presented construction‑cost and local‑market statistics intended to show that new, smaller single‑family homes on the site would not yield a commercially viable sale price after large site development costs. Counsel referenced case law on nonconforming‑use reduction as an independent basis for relief.

Neighbors said the application would change the character and livability of the neighborhood. Multiple residents from South Avenue and adjacent Talmadge Hill Road described sight‑line and traffic concerns at the South Avenue/Talmadge Hill corner, noted prior serious crashes in the same stretch, and asked how additional driveway movements and garage lighting would affect their homes. Resident Tim Dan, who lives directly across South Avenue, characterized the plan as “a considerable increase in density, waste water, and traffic on the property” and said the proposed buildings would be “inconsistent with the aesthetics of this part of New Canaan.” Another neighbor, Elizabeth Sandor (23 Talmadge Hill Road), said the existing property “has been occupied by 2 single families” for two decades and expressed concern about the scale of the replacement buildings and the impact of garage lights and driveway activity facing her home.

The applicant said it will revise materials and provide further technical backup, including drainage and septic plans (already in the record), sight‑distance calculations and clearer tabulations of existing versus proposed coverage and square feet by building. Engineer Girolando confirmed the drainage and SSDS (subsurface sewage disposal system) details are in the civil set in the record and explained that constraints from soils, setbacks to foundations and the stream, and the need for two separate septic systems shape the layout.

After public comment the applicant formally requested a continuance to the June meeting; the board agreed. The continuation gives staff and the applicant time to assemble requested clarifications on coverage per structure, precise square footage by unit, sight‑distance confirmation for the relocated Talmadge Hill driveway, and a clearer comparison of existing versus proposed building coverage and setback impacts.

No final vote was taken. The hearing will reconvene at the board’s next regular meeting; the applicant and staff agreed to provide supplemental materials in advance to help the board and the public review pending technical information.

(Notes: applicant provided a certificate of zoning compliance issued by staff confirming the site’s legally nonconforming status; notice and mailings were made and published per record; one formal letter in opposition was in the record before the meeting.)