2000-09-26
~.'
'-""
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
page 1
MINUTES
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
MEETING DATE: September 26,2000
TIME: 7:30 p.m.
Town Hall
20 Middlebush Road
Wappinger Falls, NY
Mr. Lehigh, Chairman
Mr. diPierno, Member
Mr. Fanuele, Vice Chairman
Mr. Warren, Member
Mr. Prager, Member
Members Present:
Others Present:
Ms. Lukianoff, Zoning Administrator
Mr. Roberts, Town Attorney
Ms. DiPaola, Secretary to Zoning
SUMMARIZED
Public Hearings:
Luigi Benigni
Kenneth Cole
Cellular One
- Variance granted 9/26/00
- Variance granted 9/26/00
-Adjourned Public Hearing 10/17/00
Discussions:
.'-"
Vincent Newland -Public Hearing 1 0/24/00
Grace Narvesen -Public Hearing 10/24/00
Gasland Petroleum -Discussion 11/14/00
Mr. Fanuele: Made a motion to approve the September 12,2000 minutes.
Mr. Prager: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Appeal No. 00-7061 - At the request of Luigi Benigni, who are seeking an area variance of Section 240-37
District Regulations - Whereas a 5 foot rear yard variance is required, the appellant is proposing a 1 foot rear
yard thus requestin~ 4 foot rear yard setback in order to have existin~ shed to remain where it is. The
property is located at 9 Onondaga Drive and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-03-474484 in the Town of
Wappinger.
Luigi Benigni is present for the meeting.
Mr. Benigni: I would like to be granted a variance to be able to keep the existing shed where it is. I live at 9
Onondaga Drive.
'-" Mr. Prager: You purchased the property in 1978?
Mr. Benigni: Yes.
[IDOO&~V
. .
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
"'"' page 2
Mr. Prager: The shed was on the property when you bought the house?
Mr. Benigni: Yes.
Mr. Prager:
Mr. Benigni:
Mr. Lehigh:
Mr. Benigni:
Mr. Lehigh:
Mr. Benigni:
Mr. Fanuele:
Did you make it any larger or improvements?
No.
You are asking for a 4 foot variance and you are 1 foot from the line.
Yes.
Actually the roof is over the property line.
No, it's not.
I would like to state one thing. If we approve this variance I would like to have nothing stored
behind the shed.
The rest of the board agrees.
Mr. Prager: Made a motion to be Lead Agency.
Mr. Warren: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Fanuele: Made a motion for a Negative Declaration.
Mr. diPiemo: Second the motion.
'-" Vote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Prager: Made a motion to close the public hearing.
Mr. Fanuele: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Fanuele: Made a motion to grant the variance and that nothing is to be stored behind the shed.
Mr. diPiemo: Second the motion.
Roll Call: Mr. Fanuele, aye Mr. Prager, aye Mr. Warren, aye Mr. diPiemo, aye
Mr. Lehigh, nay
2. Appeal No. 00-7064 - At the request of Kenneth Cole, who are seeking an area variance of Section 240-
37 - District Regulations - Whereas a 40 foot rear yard variance is required, the appellants are proposing a
34 foot rear yard thus requestine 6 foot rear yard setback in order to construct a 16x16 open wood
deck. The property is located at 5 Winesap Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-792111 in the
Town of Wappinger.
"'"' Kenneth Cole is present for the meeting.
. I
"-
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
page 3
Mr. Prager: Made a motion to open the public hearing.
Mr. diPiemo: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
All mailings are in order.
Mr. Cole:
I have some pictures of what the deck would look out on to. I have an existing deck there now,
and it is falling down. I want to put a new one up and make it bigger so it can hold some tables.
It comes out even with the sliding glass door.
Mr. Lehigh: This property is an odd shaped lot.
Mr. Prager: This variance is not for the whole deck just the comer of the deck. Majority of the deck is
within the setbacks.
Mr. Prager: Made motion to be Lead Agency.
Mr. Warren: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
--... Mr. Fanuele: Made a motion for a negative declaration.
Mr. Warren: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Fanuele: Made a motion to close the public hearing.
Mr. diPiemo: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Prager:
Mr. Warren:
Roll Call:
Made a motion to grant the variance.
Second the motion.
Mr. Fanuele, aye
Mr. diPiemo, aye
Mr. Prager, aye
Mr. Lehigh, aye
Mr. Warren, aye
Appeal No. 00-7062:
Variance No.1 - requesting a 350 foot variance from Section 240-81G(4)( c )(1) of the Zoning
Law of the Town of Wappinger requiring that a cell tower to be 1500 feet from an educational institution.
Variance No.2 - requesting a 130 foot variance from Section 240-81G(4)( c )(2) of the Zoning
Law of the Town of Wappinger requiring that a cell tower be 750 feet from an existing dwelling.
. Request for Interpretation - interpretation of the letter from the Zoning Administrator dated July
"-" 24,2000, which letter stated that the Planning Board did not have the authority to waive or modify setback
restrictions.
'4'
~
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
page 4
Appeal No. 00-7063:
Request for a 2 foot variance increasing the 6 foot maximum height of a fence around a cell
tower facility as set forth in Section 240-81G(5) of the Zoning Law of the Town of Wappinger. The property is
located at 20 Middlebush Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-01-353724 in the Town of Wappinger.
Chris Fisher, the applicant's attorney, Ron Graff Frequency Expert and Kelly Libolt the applicant's engineer are
all present for the meeting.
Refer to the Stenographer's minutes.
DISCUSSIONS
1. Vincent Newland - Seeking an area variance to allow existing pool to remain where it is. The property is
located at 127 River Road in the Town of Wappinger
Vincent Newland is present for the meeting.
.~
Mr. Newland: I need variance for my pool. I have 30 feet from my neighbor's property instead of 40 feet. It is
an above ground oval shape pool. I need the variance for the pool because I am putting an
addition on my house and I need to get this taken care of before I finish and get a CO from the
Building Department.
Mr. Fanuele: You do not have any other variances but the pool.
Mr. Newland: Correct.
Mr. Lehigh: We will come out and look at it.
SITE INSPECTION SEPTEMBER 30,2000 AT 9:30 a.m.
Mr. Prager: Where did you get the pool from?
Mr. Newland: Orange County Pools, they were in Fishkill.
Mr. Lehigh: We will have a public hearing on October 24,2000.
Mr. Prager: How long has the pool been there?
Mr. Newland: For 11 years.
.......
."
.......
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
page 5
2. Grace Narvesen - Seeking an area variance to allow existing pool to remain where it is. The property is
located at 52 Balfour Drive in the Town of Wappinger.
Carl Narvesen is present for the meeting.
Mr. Prager: Who put up the pool?
Mr. Narvesen: Rainbow Pools.
Mr. Prager: Did they get a permit for it?
Mr. Narvesen: We have a permit now. We had a miss communication as to who was going to get it I thought
he was going to get it. After they did all the work we discovered that they did not get a permit.
Then we found out that we needed a permit.
Mr. Prager:
When did they install it?
Mr. Narvesen: In July 2000.
Mr. Prager:
Is it an above ground pool?
Mr. Narvesen: Yes, it is a 24 foot.
'-" Mr. Lehigh:
On the drawing it doesn't show how far away it is from the deck.
Mr. Narvesen: It is about 5 feet from the deck.
Mr. Lehigh:
Ok, we will come out Saturday.
SITE INSPECTION SEPTEMBER 30,2000
Mr. Lehigh:
We will have a public hearing on October 24,2000.
3. Gasland Petroleum Co. - Seeking 2 area variances to continue to use non conforming lot. The property is
located at Route 9 and Old Hopewell Road in the Town of Wappinger.
Judd Siebert, Attorney for the applicant and Vincent Cappelletti, the applicant are present for the meeting.
Mr. Siebert: This is an application for dimensional variances that arises out of an application to be made to
the Planning Board for a site plan approval.
Mr. Lehigh: Do you realize that you have been before the board before?
Mr. Siebert:
I do and the bases for the board's prior decision, it's one under the NY law is no longer valid.
What the board decided years ago is that it did not have authority under the State Law to vary the
conditions attached to the Special Use Permit. That is under the Town Law Section 274 b 3.
.......
.....
..........
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
page 6
Mr. Lehigh: If! remember correctly it was denied because of the fact that it was too great of a variance you
were asking for.
Mr. Siebert: The bottom line decision was that the application for the variance must be denied beyond the
scope of authority of the Zoning Board. That legal basis is no longer valid. We believe that we
do satisfy those criteria for the setbacks of 2500 square feet from a gas station and 1000 foot
setback from a resident. This is the historical use of this property. It is in the Highway Business
Zone. I don't think there a determent to the community. I don't believe there will not be any
traffic conflicts.
You only want to put in a gas station, there will be no store.
No, there will be a store.
Then you are the same as the use next door.
The fact that those two uses maybe sided, it does not run the fowl of the criteria to be applied to
the application.
...... Mr. Lehigh: Weare in the process of denying Stewarts for the same thing. They with drew it and then took it
in front of the Town Board and have them change the law.
Mr. Roberts: The Town Board has established a Master Plan Review Committee and they are in front of them.
You might want to direct some correspondence to the Town Supervisor, who is Chairperson of
that Board.
Mr. Siebert: We have some problems that go without property. The parcel is a half acre. If you took the
Schedule Regulations for the Highway Business District if you looked at the uses and try to
figure out what can be placed on this parcel. You will not find much.
Mr. Lehigh: There is a new state law and he thinks we should reconsider it and hear the case again.
Mr. Siebert: We were denied in 1995.
Mr. Roberts: I have spoken to people about what the intent of the statue was. It suggests that you have the
authority to waive special conditions. Until the case is taken care of by the courts, the law has
changed and that took effect either in 1995 or 1996.
Mr. Lehigh: Then we have to listen to the case again.
Mr. Fanuele: Have you approached the Town Board and that committee to have the law changed?
'-' Mr. Siebert: I am going to try every possible aspect. I will talk to the Town Board.
Mr. Lehigh:
Mr. Siebert:
Mr. Lehigh:
Mr. Siebert:
i ..
, .
Zoning Board of Appeals
Summarized Minutes September 26,2000
~ p~7
Mr. Roberts: I think you should talk to the Town Board. The variance that is being requested is very
substantial.
Mr. Lehigh: We have to take a vote just to have him back again.
Mr. Roberts: The old laws use to be that the Zoning Board did not have the power to waive the Special Use
conditions. Now the Law appears to have changed. The Zoning Board does have the right to
change the Special Use conditions. On its surface there is a change in this application.
Mr. diPierno: Made a motion to hear the case again.
Mr. Prager: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
Mr. Lehigh: We will have a discussion on November 14,2000.
Mr. Prager: Made a motion to adjourn the meeting.
~ Mr. diPiemo: Second the motion.
V ote: All present voted aye.
MEETING ENDED
10:30 p.m.
Respectfully S ubmi tted,
Christina DiPaola, Secretary
Zoning Board of Appeals