Zoning Board of Appeals

Posted in City of Danbury Town Clerk’s office on March 17, 2025 at 1:18 pm. CITY OF DANBURY 155 DEER HILL AVENUE DANBURY, CONNECTICUT 06810 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS (203) 797-4525 www.danbury-ct.gov (203) 797-4586 FAX) ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES February 27, 2025 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chairman Joseph Hanna called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present by roll call were: William Trotta, Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, and Juan Rivas. Staff present were Zoning Enforcement Officer Sean Hearty, Secretary Melissa Llera, and Assistant Zoning Enforcement Officer Tom Bickelhaupt. Chairman Hanna seated William Trotta for Anthony Rebeiro. Chairman Hanna explains the procedures for the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES: February 13, 2025 Motion to accept the minutes from February 13, 2025 was made by Peter DeLucia; seconded by William Trotta. All in favor with Ayes of those eligible to vote: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 13, 2025 Motion to open public hearing for Application No. 25-01, 27 Barnum Road, was made by Peter DeLucia; seconded by William Trotta. Motion passed unanimously with AYES from: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. PUBLIC HEARINGS: #25-01: 27 Barnum Road, Barbecho Aucaoina, Victor Efrain; (F06060), RA-40 Zone. Sec 4.A.3. Reduce rear yard setback for detached accessory use from 20’ to 3’ to legalize previously constructed shed Victor Barbecho, homeowner, was present to represent the application. He built a shed on his property. There was a shed previously, but the new one is larger. Mr. Hanna asked if the shed was in the same place before. Mr. Barbecho said the smaller shed was in the same location before they removed it. Mr. Hanna asked why a permit was not applied for. Mr. Barbecho stated that he didn’t know he needed a permit since there had been a shed there. Mr. Hanna asked for the dimensions of the new shed; Mr. Barbecho said 18’ x 14’. Mr. Barbecho said they had planned on just repairing the old shed, but there were too many repairs, so they built a new one. Mr. Hanna asked if the new shed is 3’ from the property line; Mr. Barbecho confirms. He wasn’t aware there was a required distance from the property line. Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 27, 2025 Page 2 Mr. Hanna asked the Zoning Enforcement Officers for information on this situation. Mr. Bickelhaupt states there was an old shed according to the GIS system. It appeared to be an 8’x10’ shed in approximately the same location. Mr. Rivas asked Mr. Bickelhaupt to expand on the Cease & Desist order that was issued. Mr. Bickelhaupt said he went out to the site to inspect the shed, and during that visit also discovered a second unpermitted dwelling unit in the home. A permit has been applied for to legalize the finished basement, but a Cease was issued as part of their due process to get compliance. Mr. Hanna asks if there is electric in the shed; Mr. Barbecho said there is not. The shed will be used just to store tools. Mr. Rivas asks if the shed was placed on a concrete slab. Mr. Barbecho said there is a concrete slab to protect the contents of the shed from water infiltration. Mr. Hearty provided clarification that Zoning received a complaint from neighbors for shed construction which led them to investigate. During the visit is when they found out about the illegal apartment. There also is a gravel driveway off the main driveway that leads to the shed. Mr. Bickelhaupt said the gravel area was a travel way, but was not gravel at the time of his visit. Mr. Rivas asks the homeowner if he put in the gravel driveway. Mr. Barbecho said they added the gravel to use the path to get material down for the shed construction, but they don’t need it. Mr. Hearty said the driveway would have to be removed since there was no permit. Mr. Rivas asked why the homeowner needed the bay door in the shed. Mr. Barbecho said he has a ride on lawn mower that is 4-5 ft. wide, so it makes it easier to cut his large lawn. Mr. Rivas asked why the shed was put in that location. Mr. Barbecho said they put it there since the old shed was there. Mr. Hanna states the location could also be because of the septic. Mr. Barbecho said he had submitted a B100 to the online permit portal; Mr. Hearty shares it on the screen. Mr. Barbecho said the septic is in the backyard. Mr. Rivas feels if he dug for the gravel driveway that would have affected the septic as well. He thinks the shed could have gone on the southeast corner which would have been within setbacks and away from the leeching fields. Since the shed is so big with a concrete slab, and can be seen from the road, the homeowner should have checked with the City before construction. Mr. Botelho asks the homeowner the size of the original shed; Mr. Barbecho responds 8’x10’. Mr. DeLucia asks to confirm that he went from an 80 sq. ft. shed to 252 sq. ft.; Mr. Barbecho confirms. Mr. Botelho asks Mr. Barbecho what his hardship is. Mr. Barbecho states he doesn’t understand. Mr. Trotta asks why he built the shed bigger. Mr. Barbecho said the last shed was in poor condition, so they demolished it and made a bigger one. He didn’t know about the setbacks. He didn’t need a shed that big, but already spent the money and built it. Mr. Botelho asks the homeowner if he attempted to get a permit before construction; Mr. Barbecho says he did not. Mr. Botelho asks if the last shed was on a concrete slab; Mr. Barbecho said it was not. Mr. Trotta tells Mr. Barbecho he should learn from this for future projects; Mr. Barbecho agrees. Mr. DeLucia asks the homeowner if he explored other areas for the shed before he built it. Mr. Barbecho said he did not since this is where the old shed was, and was a flat area of land. Mr. DeLucia feels there are other areas that wouldn’t need a variance. Chairman Hanna asked if anyone was present in support of the application; No one spoke. Chairman Hanna asked if anyone was present in opposition of the application; No one spoke. Motion to close public hearing for Application No. 25-01, 27 Barnum Road, was made by Peter DeLucia; seconded by William Trotta. Motion passed unanimously with AYES from: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. Motion to open Application No. 25-01, 27 Barnum Road, for voting session was made by Juan Rivas; seconded by Peter DeLucia. Motion passed unanimously with AYES from: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. Mr. Hanna knows that you need a reserve area for the septic with setbacks, and isn’t sure how that affected the shed placement. Mr. Trotta says it is a tough decision because the shed and concrete are Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 27, 2025 Page 3 already there, but was done without the variance. Mr. DeLucia feels the applicant has room to move the shed and possibly make it smaller. Mr. Botelho doesn’t feel a hardship was stated, and the structure was put up illegally; Mr. Trotta agrees. Mr. Trotta wonders if they could just move the shed and concrete; Mr. Botelho clarifies that the concrete would need to be ripped up and re-laid if that is what they decide. Mr. Hanna asks the Zoning Enforcement Officers if they have any input. Mr. Hearty clarifies that neither he nor Mr. Bickelhaupt could provide information during voting session that could possibly sway the Board’s decision. Motion to deny without prejudice Application No. 25-01, 27 Barnum Road, was made by Juan Rivas; seconded by William Trotta. Mr. Rivas doesn’t feel a hardship was clearly stated, nor is it the minimum variance necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. He believes they could move the shed to meet the required setbacks. Prior to the roll call vote, Mr. Rivas clarifies as a point of order that a Yes vote agrees with motion of denial and Nay vote disagrees with the denial. Motion to deny without prejudice passed unanimously via roll call vote with AYES from: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn was made by Juan Rivas; seconded by Peter DeLucia. Motion passed unanimously with AYES from: Peter DeLucia, Brandon Botelho, William Trotta, Juan Rivas, and Joseph Hanna. Meeting adjourned at 7:37 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Melissa Llera Recording Secretary