By Noah Zucker

MILFORD — The city’s Board of Adjustment met some heavy criticism this week.

Milford resident Jennifer Cinelli-Miller said she believes the board grants too many requests for variances to the zoning code.

“This ongoing approval policy must stop, and if I have to attend every board meeting going forward to release all the variances to the public that you have granted to present the impact you have created on stormwater, roads, utilities and the environment, just to name a few, I will,” she said at the board’s Thursday meeting.

“I’m requesting you deny all applications submitted without proof of hardship that has occurred outside of the purchase of the property as it currently exists,” Ms. Cinelli-Miller said. “A variance should only be granted when a unique practical difficulty or undue hardship” is present.

She added, “Efforts at promoting good design are clearly in jeopardy if you continue to approve variances solely because of all the people pleading inconvenience, financial burden, vague notions of possible property value decline and lack of awareness of the requirements for the basis of a variance.”

She believes that many of the variances that have been requested and granted should not have been, as many property owners request variances from codes that were present when they bought their property. Those people, Ms. Cinelli-Miller said, should be expected to keep renovations to their homes within the code.

But members of the board and other city leaders said that Ms. Cinelli-Miller was not airing her complaints to the correct group of people.

“You may want to take that speech to City Council or somewhere,” said Brendon Warfel, chairman of the board.

“I’m not sure she’s familiar with the parameters the (board) has to work within,” said Nadia Zychal, the board’s vice chairwoman, in an interview after the meeting. “I think a lot of her concerns would probably be best addressed to City Council and the Planning Committee.”

But Ms. Cinelli-Miller was convinced she was in the right place.

“You are above what City Council decides. You have the right to say no,” she said. “You are a higher legal board responsible for denying these variances unless a hardship can be proven.”

Rob Pierce, Milford’s planning and economic development director, said the Board of Adjustment is responsible for the administration of the zoning code and reviews variance requests for deviations from code.

“The Planning Commission makes final determinations on permitted-use site plans,” on the other hand, he said.

In addition to being in charge of preparing a comprehensive plan for the city, Mr. Pierce said “the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council on major subdivisions, zoning changes, code amendments (and) conditional-use applications.”

After hearing those recommendations, he added, “City Council makes final determinations on major subdivisions, zoning changes, code amendments, conditional-use applications, annexations and adopts the comprehensive plan,” he said.

Ms. Zychal still described Ms. Cinelli-Miller as well-intentioned.

“I always appreciate hearing from people and their concerns,” Ms. Zychal said. “I think it is important for the community to be involved.”

Ms. Cinelli-Miller listed a broad array of impacts she viewed as results of the board’s approvals. She said she believes the practices that caused torrential flooding in Ellicott City, Maryland — where she used to live — are currently being carried out in Milford.

“The addition of large amounts of residential sprawl, as well as added impervious surfaces, combined with the surrounding waterways, created a 100-year and a 500-year flood within a five-year period,” she said of Ellicott City.

“Milford is headed for this reality should these approvals continue,” Ms. Cinelli-Miller said.

Additionally, she said, “The city has permitted building within the local wetlands, which will undoubtedly cause environmental issues not limited to flooding and pollution.”

Ms. Cinelli-Miller added that variances to the code have, at times, made it hard for school buses to navigate certain subdivisions and that she believes decisions the board has made regarding setbacks and lot coverage could become problematic later if the state-maintained roads some of these properties lie on are expanded.

Ms. Cinelli-Miller was very focused on one specific test of the board’s, saying “the litmus test is undue hardship.”

This “litmus test” is described in Milford’s zoning code. It allows the board to grant “variances from the terms of this chapter as will not be contrary to the public interest where, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the chapter will result in unnecessary hardship or exceptional practical difficulties and so that the spirit of the chapter shall be observed and substantial justice done.”

But City Solicitor David Rutt said there are other conditions the board has to take into consideration.

“There’s a couple of different tests,” he said, like how the surrounding neighborhood would be impacted by a variance or whether there is an exceptional difficulty present. The board also has the right to grant special exemptions to the zoning code.

The city solicitor also added that the board considers individual variance requests within the context of the zoning code applicable to the specific lot in question — not the city in aggregate.

Rob Pierce, the city’s planning and economic development director, invited Ms. Cinelli-Miller to participate in conversations the Planning Committee will have this year surrounding changes to the zoning ordinance. He said he believes these talks would be more applicable to her concerns.

“The Planning Commission is going to be reviewing the zoning ordinance over the next several months to try to address some of the reoccurring applications that come before the board,” he said.

Mr. Pierce said variance requests that have been repeatedly approved, like for new decks or accessory sheds greater than 150 square feet, could be incorporated into the code.

“Those are things the Planning Committee needs to take a look at and see if the community still wants to adhere to certain standards,” he said. “Maybe they need to be reviewed or revised.”