Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves retroactive deck projection variances for two Chestnut Street homes
Summary
After examining as-built plans and a plan-routing/surveyor issue, the Milford ZBA approved front-projection variances to allow existing deeper decks at 1 Chestnut and 3 Chestnut to remain, conditioned on submitted survey materials.
The Milford Zoning Board of Appeals approved separate motions on July 14 to allow existing deck projections to remain at two properties on Chestnut Street, finding mitigating procedural circumstances after staff review.
Attorney Thomas Lynch said the two houses largely match the coastal site plan but the decks were built deeper than the approved plans. Zoning enforcement officer Steven Harris told the board he had been provided a set of as-built plans that had reached the building and engineering departments but had not been routed to the zoning office in a timely way. “The houses that they built… are zoning-compliant except for the decks,” Harris said during the meeting.
Board members acknowledged concerns about retroactive approvals, with one member saying these approvals “cannot go without comment” and warning against a pattern of retroactive variances. Still, members who voted in favor cited surveyor errors, plan-routing mistakes between departments and the applicant’s willingness to condition approval on submitted survey documentation.
The board approved a motion to vary the front projection at 1 Chestnut to 12.1 feet where 16 feet is permitted (survey dated 04/20/26 referenced) and a separate motion to vary the front projection at 3 Chestnut to 12.7 feet where 16 feet is permitted, both conditioned on the submitted materials. Members said the houses were shifted forward slightly and that decks were made deeper than originally approved, attributing the situation chiefly to multiple surveyors and plan-handling irregularities.
Although board members expressed policy reservations about retroactive approvals, the motions passed after members concluded the failures in plan routing and multiple surveyors created unique circumstances warranting relief.
The board recorded the approvals and noted that any further engineering requirements (e.g., elevation certificates, plantings) must be satisfied before permit finalization.
