A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Applicants present revisions for 65 Station Street office proposal; commission asks for retaining‑wall and parking details

January 30, 2026 | Fairfield, Fairfield, Connecticut


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Applicants present revisions for 65 Station Street office proposal; commission asks for retaining‑wall and parking details
Representatives for SF Station Street LLC presented design revisions for a proposed office building at 65 Station Street during the Jan. 29 Fairfield Historic District Commission meeting.

Chris Russo, speaking for the pre‑applicant, introduced David Ball to review updated drawings. Ball said the front entrance was reconfigured from a double gable to a single gable and that window detailing was updated with gable heads; gutters, downspouts, exterior lighting and a circular vent were also added. "We reconfigured that part of the building so that now it is a single gable," Ball said while showing close‑up elevations.

Ball presented contextual photos and a height comparison with the nearby church, saying the church main gable is approximately 59 feet and the proposed building’s mid‑gable is about 26 feet 4 inches (roughly 30 feet to the full gable). He said screening and site planting reduce visibility from the street and that a dumpster enclosure will be finished in painted vertical cedar siding with barn‑style doors to match the site character.

On site engineering, Ball said he is working with a civil engineer to eliminate or minimize a retaining wall; if required the wall would be reinforced concrete faced with veneer stone and would be only 2–3 feet high. Commissioners pressed about ADA sidewalk/accessible sidewalk elements and asked for a licensed arborist’s tree survey. Ball also acknowledged interest in parking reductions but said current zoning does not yet permit reductions until regulations are revised; he suggested permeable or grass‑block solutions as possible interim options.

Commissioners generally praised the revisions and asked for additional details and material samples at formal submission. Russo and Ball thanked the commission and said they would return with more detailed materials and engineering documentation before a final hearing.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee