Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Torrington ZBA denies variance to allow carport at 6 Andrews Street
Summary
The Torrington Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 10 denied Helen S. Decker’s request for a variance to allow a proposed detached carport to sit 0 feet from the principal dwelling, concluding the application did not meet the hardship standard required by zoning regulations.
The Torrington Zoning Board of Appeals on Feb. 10 denied a request by Helen S. Decker for a variance to allow 0 feet of setback between a proposed detached carport and the principal dwelling at 6 Andrews Street.
Board members and staff reviewed survey measurements and zoning rules before voting. Land use staff explained the relevant rule: accessory (detached) structures require a 5-foot side-yard setback but also must be 10 feet from the principal building under Section 5.2.1.E of the zoning regulations; Decker was seeking a waiver of that 10-foot separation. The board discussed whether the property’s corner-lot configuration created a hardship tied to the lot’s orientation.
The practical question for the board was whether the lot’s configuration left no feasible, compliant location for the carport. Decker said the property has “5 plus and then 7 plus” feet along portions of the lot and described constraints including sewer and water lines and proximity to Pierce Street that limit alternate siting. Land use staff told the board: “the variance that you're requesting is for that 10 foot because you meet the 5 foot on the side, but you don't meet the 10 foot from the house.”
Commissioners acknowledged sympathy for Decker’s personal circumstances but repeatedly noted that, under the applicable statutory hardship standard, hardship cannot be solely personal or financial and must relate to the property’s orientation or physical characteristics. A staff explanation summarized the likely next steps if the variance had been granted (permit application and land-record filing) and the alternatives if denied (appeal to Superior Court or zoning enforcement to require removal or relocation).
After deliberation, a motion to approve the requested variance failed on a roll call vote of 0–5. The board chair said the variance was not granted and offered to meet with Decker and land use staff about next steps.
The decision leaves the property in nonconformance with the regulation unless Decker pursues appeal or seeks another remedy with the land use office.
