Brentwood ZBA denies variance request for 22x40 garage at 20 Gallant Drive

The Brentwood Zoning Board of Adjustment voted to deny a variance request by Kim and Tom Oliver to construct a 22-by-40 detached garage at 20 Gallant Drive that would encroach 10 feet into the town's required 25-foot side-yard setback.

The Olivers presented photographs, a plot plan and a recent survey, and described site constraints including existing trees, a pool and a gazebo. Kim Oliver said, "We moved in about a year and a half ago and knew that when we moved in, we wanted to build a detached garage," and explained that placing the garage farther back would push it into the middle of the yard and require more pavement. Land use administrator Mark Kennedy and members reviewed the plot plan and noted the proposed garage would be about 15 feet from the Butters property line on one side and that the proposal would place roughly 25% of the structure within the setback.

Brentwood Town Planner Glenn Greenwood submitted a memorandum dated 04/09/2025 concluding the applicant should construct the garage outside the side-yard setback. Greenwood's memo (included in the packet) noted the proposed garage would encroach 10 feet into the required 25-foot sideline setback and that the property has area where a garage could be sited without encroachment. During discussion board members repeatedly referenced the five variance criteria under state law and the town ordinance (zoning setbacks established in Article 3). One member said, "The applicant has space and room on the property to build a building within the setback requirements," and another observed the 25-foot setback provision has been in the ordinance for decades and is a longstanding expectation of town voters.

Board members discussed alternatives raised by the applicants — shifting the garage laterally or moving it farther back — and members said the practical alternatives meant the hardship standard was not met. One board member summarized concerns that granting the variance would be "contrary to the public interest" and several members said the "spirit of the ordinance would not be observed" if relief were granted. Following discussion, a motion to deny the variance was made and seconded; the board voted by voice to deny the application. The chair advised the applicants they would receive a written decision and that a 30-day appeal period applies.

No formal conditions or mitigation were adopted for a partial approval; the board's decision was denial based on the variance criteria as discussed. The Olivers were told they would receive the decision by email once the chair signs it and were informed of the 30-day appeal period.