Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board Approves Setback and Lot-Coverage Variances for Two Mazarick Avenue Two‑Family Buildings
Summary
The Zoning Board unanimously approved variances for rear-yard setbacks and small increases in lot coverage at two Mazarick Avenue parcels, citing nonconforming lots created when the town took five feet of frontage decades ago and FEMA-driven construction constraints.
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Stratford Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously approved Dec. 3 applications to reduce rear-yard setbacks and allow small increases in lot coverage for two-family structures on Mazarick Avenue.
Desmond Zee, representing Fairfield County Homebuyers LLC, told the board the properties were built under earlier variances and then elevated to meet FEMA flood regulations (structures in an AE zone with base flood elevation plus 12 inches). During construction, utility-company requirements for exterior meter access forced the addition of stairs and deck footprint that encroach slightly into the rear-yard setback. Zee said the lots had five feet of frontage taken by the town decades ago—creating nonconforming parcels that cannot be feasibly enlarged.
Planning staff confirmed the flood-elevation and meter-access constraints and said similar variance applications are pending in town. Neighbor Oscar Cuellar asked whether the work would require moving a fence that separates properties; Zee and the chair clarified on the record that the applicant will not move the neighbor’s fence and that the encroachment relates only to deck/stair footprints and elevated equipment placement.
Board members described the changes—about 1.2% increases in lot coverage and encroachments of roughly 1.4–1.8 feet—as minimal and related to necessary compliance with FEMA and utility requirements. Miss Doolin moved to approve the two petitions; Miss Cleary seconded. The roll-call vote was 5–0 in favor. The board recorded the variances as approved with the record noting the nonconforming-lot history and as-built constraints that gave rise to the requests.

