Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant seeks variance for front‑yard shed; zoning board finds application incomplete
Summary
The Town of Chester Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed a variance request for a partially built accessory building at 952 Lakes Road but said the application lacks required plans, dimensions and a clear footprint; the board adjourned consideration to July 9 and asked the applicant to provide as‑filed drawings and elevations.
The Town of Chester Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed an application for an accessory building at 952 Lakes Road and determined the filing is incomplete, adjourning consideration to the board’s July 9 meeting.
Chair Greg Feigelson told the applicant the board could not proceed without documentation showing the structure’s exact footprint. “This board needs to see… In order for us to issue a variance, we have to either have plans showing exactly where it’s going to be positioned,” Feigelson said.
The board opened the item by noting a building‑permit denial dated March 9, 2026, for a shed in the front yard of a parcel in an SR2 zoning district, where accessory buildings in the front yard are not permitted. The applicant said the structure is partially built and described the intended final shape. “It’s partially being built,” the applicant told the board.
Members repeatedly requested either an as‑built drawing or a proposed plan that marks the building footprint, dimensions, and relationship to property lines and the existing septic leach field. Board members and staff raised concerns that satellite lot lines and aerial images did not make it clear whether the shed sits on a property line or partially on a neighbor’s driveway.
Because the proposed footprint may determine whether a front‑yard variance, setbacks or other relief are required, the board agreed it could not schedule a public hearing on the incomplete submission. The board adjourned the application to its July 9 meeting and asked the applicant to file the building‑department plans and elevation views showing siding and finished appearance before that date.
The board also suggested the applicant consult the surveyor who prepared the proposed survey so the drawing can be annotated with the exact shed footprint. If the applicant files the requested drawings the board will revisit the variance request at the July 9 meeting.
