Zoning board continues 52 Carroll Street multi-variance application after driveway-grade concerns

The Danbury City Zoning Board of Appeals on March 27 continued application 25-04, for 52 Carroll Street, to its April 10 meeting after members raised questions about driveway grades, retaining-wall design and whether the proposed work would require additional variances.

Neil Marcus, attorney for the applicants, and Donus Verbakis, a professional engineer, presented the proposal: convert a bungalow to a ranch-style dwelling, add a two-story infill and a proposed garage (15 feet by 20 feet) located within the front-yard setback, allow parking within the front yard, permit an accessory structure forward of the primary structure and authorize grading within 5 feet of a property line. Verbakis said the parcel is about 14,000 square feet and described steep site topography and an existing driveway with a roughly 23% grade.

Verbakis told the board the proposed garage would sit no closer than about 16.9 feet from the front property line in a zone that requires a 30-foot front-yard setback; the application therefore seeks roughly a 13.1-foot variance to build the garage where shown. He also said the design would shorten and regrade the existing driveway to a conceptual grade of about 16%; he and counsel said they would attempt to reduce that further, perhaps toward 12%, but that a 12% standard may not be achievable without major excavation or rock work.

Several neighbors and the Lake Wabeka Association sent letters in support, read into the record by the applicant’s representative. The board’s technical concern centered on whether improving an existing, nonconforming driveway (23% today) down to the proposed grades required a formal variance under zoning code (one member cited section 8 b 3). Staff and counsel explained that, in some cases, improving an existing nonconformity can be permitted without a variance if it does not increase nonconformity; other members said the board should see engineered grade drawings so the board can determine whether the change would be sufficiently conforming.

“We can make the driveway much better than what currently is,” Verbakis said, noting retaining walls and cuts into slope; he and the applicant agreed to prepare grade profiles and retaining-wall heights for the board to review. After a brief deliberation about re-advertising risk and whether to require an immediate driveway variance, the board voted to continue the hearing to April 10, 2025, so the applicant can supply the requested drawings.

Mister Rivas moved to continue application 25-04 to April 10, 2025; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The continuance gives the applicant time to submit grade-specific drawings and any revised site plans for the board’s final consideration.