Middletown board denies requested setback relief for 13 Fairview after neighbor objections

The Town of Middletown Zoning Board denied a petition from owner Ryan Miller (applicant represented by Brian Schell of Schell Architecture) to add a second floor over an existing garage and a 12‑by‑21‑foot stair/entry addition at 13 Fairview Avenue, a property with an existing garage located approximately 1.5 feet from the rear property line.

Schell told the board the resubmitted site plan clarified square footage and showed the proposed second floor would meet building height, lot coverage and most setbacks, but that relief was needed for the rear yard setback because the existing garage already sits inside the setback. He said the addition was planned to preserve the existing two‑car garage while providing an interior stair to a future second floor that the owner may use as storage or, eventually, as an accessory dwelling for a relative.

Neighbors who testified against the request said the addition would be a substantial encroachment into the setback, would block a significant portion of sky and light from the back yards of directly abutting houses, and would exacerbate existing on‑street parking problems. Several speakers tied the request to concerns about short‑term rental use: Anne O'Donnell said the property next door has been occupied by college students and that short‑term rentals in nearby houses have increased parking and traffic pressures. A written letter from abutter Ronald Eckert was entered into the record and summarized similar safety and congestion concerns.

During deliberations Commissioners questioned whether the petition demonstrated the hardship and least‑relief nexus required for a variance. A motion to approve the petition was made and seconded, but the four voting members eligible on this continuance (who were present for the initial hearing) recorded opposing votes, and the petition was denied 4–0.

The meeting record indicates the board considered alternatives raised by commissioners and neighbors — for example, turning the structure or reorienting the garage — and noted that applicants could revise plans and return with a different design. The board also noted that building‑permit review would govern parking, stormwater control and other construction specifications if the applicant chooses to redesign and reapply.

"I don't feel that I can support this," Commissioner (voting member) said during deliberations, noting the board was unconvinced hardship and least‑relief standards were met. The denial was recorded 4–0.