The URL can be used to link to this page

1995-08-29IR Town of Wappinger August 29; 1995 T-enda - 7:30 P.M. Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, N.Y. Approval of June 27 and July.11, 1995 minutes. PUBLIC HEARING Appeal :#1207 - At the request of Spotted Owl Development Corp. who is seeking a _variance of Article TV, Section 411.7; whereas you are rtr-quirPd to maintain 1 acre and you are showing .78, thus rpgmi � .22 variance for an existing undersized lot on property located at 6 Montfort Road and is identified as Tax Grid #19-6358-01-144515-O0 in the Town of Wappinger. ADJOURNED PUBLIC HEARING Appeal 41204 - At the request of Rabco Landscaping & Contracting, Inc. (Contract Vendee) who is seeking a variance of Article TV, Section 422.8, paragraph 7, wherein you are not to exceed 2000 sq. ft. in total area and you are requesting a building of 4000 sq. ft., plus or minus, as well as outside storage of nursery retail sales material on property located at Route 82 & All Angels Hill Road and is identifiPd as Tax Grid #19-6357-03-220050-00 in the Town of Wappinger.. DISCUSSION Joseph Knob Jerry Nika & Joan Husni - Discuss Appeal #$1208 requesting a 28 ft. front -yard variance for property located at 95 Osborne Hill Road and a 50 ft. front -yard variance for property located at Osborne Hill Road -Rear in the Town of Wappinger. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals August 29; 1995 Minutes Members Present Mr. Sasser: Chairman Mr. Prager: Member Mr. Fanuele: Member Mr. Lehigh: Member Members Absent Mr. diPierno: Member Others Present Mrs. Linda Nguyen, Secretary to the Z.B.A. ROLL CALL T3 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, N.Y. ''=". - SCEP 2 ; 1"5 PLANNING _r,. , .,. ri r ar Mr. Sasser: Ladies and gentlemen this is a no smoking building. If you must smoke please go outside. Also, there is no smoking in the restrooms. Just for your information there is emergency exits here and through the back doors in any direction you go will lead to the outside. The first item of business tonight is the approval of June 27th minutes. hip. Prager: I make a motion to accept the minutes. Mr. Fanuele: Second. Vote: All aves. Mr. Sasser, The second item is the approval of the July 11th minutes. Mr. Fanuele: I make a motion we accept the minutes. Mr. Prager: Second. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Sasser: The first item on the agenda tonight is a public hearing of Appeal -1207 at the request of Spotted Owl Development Corp. who is seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 411.71 whereas you are required to maintain 1 acre and you are showing .78, thus requiring a .22 variance for an existing undersized lot on property located at 6 Montfort Road and is identified as Tax Grid #19-6358-01-144515-00 in the Town of Wappinger. Here representing Spotted Owl tonight is Joel Hania. Can I have a motion to open the public hearing? �Mr. Prager: I make a motion to open the public hearing. AW Lehigh: Second. Vote: All aves. Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 1 Mr. Hanig: We are here before the Zoning Board tonight asking relief from Section 411.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. By way of some history and the way that we wound up before this Board is that this property just by history, and I did provide members of the Zoning Board with a history of the property conveyances, wound up in a foreclosure in or about 1991/1992. In 1992 Dime Savings Bank on a foreclosure became the owner of this property as well as the adjoining lot. Subsequent to Dime acquiring title to this'. Dime then went and listed the property with a real estate broker. The property was then marketed by Dime and the real estate broker and that is when my clients became interested in the property, Vincent Murphy or Spotted Owl Development Corp. After they saw the property and the way that the property looked on the street they decided to go and meet with Mr. Levenson, the Zoning Administrator to find out whether or not this property consisted of two separate lots that could be built upon. A meeting took place between Mr. Levenson, Vincent Murphy, Mark Schwebel and Michael Harrington who is the real estate broker involved_ Everybody that was at that meetina from our end is present in this room tonight. We have Mr. Michael Harrington who is the gentlemen in the white shirt. He can tell the Board exactly what happened at that meeting as well as Mr. Murphy and Mr. Schwebel. I am going to ask Mr. Harrington to tell everybody what happened since he has no interest in the outcome in this particular application before us. He has no connection with this particular piece of property. They went in and they saw Mr. Levenson and they asked Mr. I-venson whether or not this was one lot or two lots. Mr. Levenson looked up and he told them that it's two lots. There is two separate tax arid numbers assigned to this and they said, well then can we build on what I will call Lot ##2? They said, yes, you will not have a problem building on Lot #21. but you have to get Board of Health approval for that lot in order to go forward. So, they then went back to Mr. Harrington's office and put down a binder check and entered into a contract to buy this lot and subsequently closed title on this whole piece of property sold to them by Dime Savings Bank which consisted of both tax parcels in a single deed. Thev did aet a single deed for both tax parcels. They subsequently took Lot # .. I will call it ##524, which is the lot that had the house on it and sold it to people named DeCarlo. This took place in January 1994. They then went and started going forward and hiring an engineer and doing whatever had to be done to get to the point where they would be able to apply for a permit on Lot ##2. So, this was done and they came into Town Hall. They went in and they made application, or maybe it was verbal or written, I am not sure, but what ultimately happened was that they were not able to get a building permit because the situation it appears was referred to Mr. Roberts. Mr. Roberts issued a direction to the Buildina Inspector that no building permit was to be issued because this would violate the Zoning Ordinance. I believe that we have a copy of that and I think I did supply the Board with a copy of that letter that was issued by Mr. Roberts. There is Board of Health approval for this lot. There was a sewage disposal system designed and we did provide also as part of this application a copy of the Board of Health approval for this lot. So, what we have is a lot which clearly appears to violate the Town of Wappinger ldina Code because it is a lot that is under 1 acre, but at the same me the client bought under the circumstances when they believe that they M n Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 2 wuld be able to utilize that property for the purpose of construction of a single family house as well as being able to sell the existing family House which was on Lot 's1. So, what we are doing is we have now come before this Board for an area variance asking for relief from the Zoning Ordinance as an area variance on the grounds that a variance is required for them to make use of this property. There are other properties within the area that are similarly situated in terms of lot size. That to allow them to go forward would not substantially change the character of the neighborhood and in fact would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. To have them simply retain a vacant lot without the ability to do anything to it would really be an inequity. Based upon that we are applying for a variance to go forward and build a house on Lot #2. There is only one variance that can be applied for. We don't have the ability to change the size of the lot. So, the variance that we are applying for is a variance that would allow this .78 acre lot to house a single family home. Other than that, side lot lines would be kept in accordance with the Zoning ordinance. Setbacks would be kept in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. All other rules and regulations of the Zoning Ordinance would be complied with. Because this is the only Board that can grant relief, that is why we are before this Board. If the Board would like to hear from Mr. Harrington, I do have him here. He is the person that was present at that meeting and can tell you about the meeting that took place with Mr. Levenson because absent that meeting, my clients wouldn't have bought the property. Sasser: Linda, before we go any further, did you get all of the receipts back? Mrs. Nguyen: Yes. Mr. Harrington: I showed a number of pieces of property to Vince and he came up with this one as one of the properties that he was interested in. Mr. Sasser: Just refresh me again. What was your involvement in this? Mr. Harrington: I am a real estate broker. He was looking for a piece of property. Mr. Roberts: Joel, why don't you get his name and address and all of that? Full name and address, who he works for and who he is licensed with. Mr. Harrington: Michael W. Harrington. My address is 2352 Route 52 in Stormville. At the time of this transaction I had worked for Prudential Canterbury Realty. I presently work for Weichert Real Estate. Mr. Sasser: Are you a broker? Mr. Harrington: I am an associate broker. Sasser: You are working for that agency? Mr. Harrington: Yes, I am an associate broker. I showed them the house and the piece of property and all the relevant information about the Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 3 property as far as the mets and bounds. Herb pulled the tax map and that is where it came up that there were two definitions of property and one of the questions that Vince had was, can I do anything with this other lot? Mince arranged to have a meeting and Mark, Vince and myself met with Herb. The specific question was if I go forward and attempt to buy this piece of property will I be able to build a house on this lot. Herb pulled his tax maps and looked at it and said his concerns were around Board of Health approval and provided that it could be accommodated that he didn't see any problem. After that meeting Vince was satisfied that he could get what he expected out of the piece of property and went back; wrote an offer and presented it to Dime and ultimately he purchased two tax parcels. Mr. Hanig: Mr. Murphy would only say the same thing that Mr. Harrington said so I don't have anything further to present to this Board. Mr. Sasser: Thank you Mr. Hanig. At this point, I would ask Mr. Parsons if he would like to speak now? Mr. Parsons: Yes; I represent the Town of Wappinger Planning Board, in fact I am the chairman of it. There is one item that they left out in their descriptions of the past. That was their application for the Planning Board. Mr. Schwebel, I believe made that or someone made it in his .. in tact they were before us two different times with two different -'-leas of moving the lot line one time and turning around and making a hb6or change with the property the second time. Mr. Sasser: Is this at the time when there was the same owner for both lots? Mr. Parsons: No, this was the time when the property was being offered by Dime Savings. At this particular time, they claimed to be and I am not sure it it was contract vendee or if they were in feeling us out as to what could be done with the property. Mr. Roberts: It was in common ownership when Dime had it. Mr. Parsons: I don't remember. All I know is that .. Mr. Roberts: If we could just go through the lineage. The one lot and I will just use the last 3 digits from the tax map, ##515 Mr. Sasser: »515 is the unimproved lot? Mr. Roberts: It is the unimproved lot. That one was acquired by Caputo from Gold in 1964. About two years prior to that Mr. & Mrs. Cosgrove had acquired «524 also from Gold .. Mr. Parsons: Let me clarify what I was talking about as far as the Planning Board is concerned. You know if we get too many cooks it spoils broth. What I am saying is they came before the Planning Board and VV th times we told them it couldn't happen. We told them the reason it couldn't happen was because the property basically was one lot and there was a real reason for it being one lot. That being of course and I will go from the beginning where we will deal with this situation. If you look In Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 4 map #1 that I gave you. You will find that the house on lot #1 or Lot A, I have them numbered A and B. the house is partially on Lot #2. Mr. Sasser: Mr. Hanig, do you have copies of these maps that he is referrina to? Mr. Hanig: I know what he is talking about because it is on the .. Mr. Sasser: Why don't you take these so you can follow along and know exactly what Mr. Parsons is saying. Mr. Parsons: The red line that you will see through that map is actually the lot line and it designates and separates the two lots that are in discussion tonight. If you notice on it that the house that was built on Lot A. it was built back in the area of 1964 by Thomas Cosgrove, he discovered that he had built his house partially on the lot next to it. He in turn bought the lot that the Gold brothers, and you have to back up and remember the Gold brothers sold all of these properties to everyone in that area that purchased them. The Gold brothers back in January 23, 1964 and if you look on the history sheet I gave you it's called Lot B. It is the second item there, was sold to Caputo. Then, on the 29th of January in 1965, Caputo and his wife sold it to the Cosgrove's. For the very simple reason Cosgrove's wanted it because of the fact that their house was actually on Caputo's lot. In 1987, Cosgrove's sold their house. the r-rcel, what we are considering Lot A and Lot B, they sold it as a nibined thing. I have a copy of all the deeds here. Mr. Sasser: I believe that we have copies of the deeds as well. Mr. Parsons: Showing that the description called for one lot with one house on it. It set in that situation until such time as in 1991 when Capobianco divorced and there was a settlement. In the process Mrs. Capobianco ended up with the property. At that particular time the deed called for one piece of property for that house. In 1992, the Dime Savings Bank foreclosed on the property. At that particular time, through the courts, took possession of this property as one lot. Then, June 24, 1993, Dime Savings Bank sold it to Vincent J. Murphy. Again, description calling for one lot. On November of 1993, Vincent Murphy turned around and transferred the property to the Spotted Owl Development Corp., but when he did he did something that the Planning Board claimed and I am claiming is that he subdivided the property illegally. He never came before the Planning Board in the Town of Wappinger and applied for a subdivision. Because of these old tax descriptions and the two separate properties on the tax map and the two separate numbers which has no bearing on it whatsoever because we discussed this with Tom Logan, who is the Assessor in Wappinger. We also discussed it with Curran that heads up the Tax Department in the County and they both said regardless how it is shown on a tax map it has no bearing on what the property is. It can be one tax number, it could be three tax numbers. They try to correct these, but they do get by them. Thereis times, and this is an example that it by them and it gets carried as two tax numbers. But, it doesn't make subdivision. What made this property as one lots was these continual transfers of the property as one lot. One lot, one lot, and one lot. It was continually transferred as one lot. That and under the ordinance of Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Wappinger make it one lot. The M, n Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 r Page 5 Sily wav to make it two lots is you have to go through a subdivision. After Murphy transferred it to Spotted Owl as two lots with two deeds, he turned around and Lot #A or the first lot or the lot with the house on it. he turned around and transferred it back to himself again as one lot to Murphy. Now, Murphy then turned around and took that lot, the one with the house, Lot A. this illegal lot in our eyes, and transferred it to DeCarlo. Unfortunately, he also ended up with a piece of property, Decarlo did, where his house is on somebody elses property. So, they made a correction deed. As near as I can figure out Spotted Owl which actually ended up as the owner of Lot #2 or Lot B gave an easement for Lot B because part of the house that is on Lot A is on Lot B, which can't be. You dust can't do things like this. You can't have a house on two pieces of property and two different owners. Mr. Sasser: How wasn't the other lot picked up by the Title Co.? Mr. Parsons: That is an excellent question. As far as the Planning Board is concerned, this variance shouldn't be considered because the lot in question, Lot B. is not a lot. It is part .. Lot A & B are one lot and at no time was there any subdivision to separate it. Mr. Sasser: Mr. Parsons, correct me if I am wrong, the Planning Boards opinion is that this should not even be considered based on the fact that no lot exist` r Parsons: That is correct. We, as Mr. Roberts reminded me of course, we have concerns about Lot 1 and Lot 2 because originally and I have a map that I will give you showing some of the many different ways they tried to skirt the situation where the house is on the wrong property. Thev turned around and made one application where it was a lot line revision. We have had numerous applications basically from the same people. This particular one shows how they tried to get around the fact that the house is on the second lot. We again at this particular time said you can't do this. Mr. Sasser: What, was this a proposed lot line revision? Mr. Parsons: Yes, this came before the Planning Board as a proposed lot line. Again, we pointed out to them, you see I didn't sit in on this Herb Levenson deal. I do know that this has been going on for some time and I don't know the date of their meeting. I do know that Herb was in and sat in on all of these meetings while we continually said, no, no, no. You are dealing with one lot and you can't do these things. Mr. Prager: Mr. Parsons, you said that you have the deeds for all of this information? Mr. Parsons: These deeds are in the order of that history sheet that I gave you. They follow right along. One, two, three, right down the line so thev are all in order. Prager: The deeds that I have that was sent to us were really tdated. They were not helping me at all. That is why I wanted to make sure that we have the deed for this. Mr. Sasser: Al, do you have anything you want to say? Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 6 Mr. Roberts: There is just a couple of things that I would like to clarify.. One, this parcel had been in continuous ownership since Cosgrove acquired the vacant lot from Caputo back in 1965. It had continued in common ownership from that point Cosgrove through Capobianco, two transfers into Capobianco and then the acquisition by Dime Savings Bank. I don't know what occurred at the closing with Dime Savings Bank, but there appeared to be some last minute changes to the legal description because they are handwritten. Mr. Sasser: It was in common ownership until about 1994, is that correct? Mr. Roberts: It was in common ownership through January of 1994 I believe. Mr. Sasser: O.k., right that is what I thought. Mr. Roberts: Perhaps Joel, Joel I just like to get some factual matters straightened out. In the deed dated June 24, 1993 from Dime to Murphy. On the first page of the deed it refers to a schedule A and then there is some handwritten notations with an insert of two grid numbers. Schedule A has a mets and bounds description, which appears to be taken from an earlier deed, which is the combined and then it has parcel A amended and also a prior reference that the parcels are being described as parcel A & B but only parcel A was attached to the deed that was recorded. Are you niliar with what I am saying? Mr. Hanig: I know what the deed shows. Do you know what that is all about? Ms. Cartularo: Hi, I am from the Title Co. We did the search on this. Mr. Sasser: Can we have your name please? Ms. Cartularo: My name is Loronda Cartularo. Mr. Sasser: And the name of the company? Ms. Cartularo: Beacon Abstract, we are based out of Rhy. What happened when we did the search .. it was long and whatever and it got to the foreclosure action and we found two separate parcels. We found two separate tax maps and two separate parcels. Therefore, we called the Assessors office to clarify that it is two separate tax lots and two separate parcels, which he verified. Therefore, we did a search and we did the schedule A's and we did two separate schedule A's, which were sent to the Countv Clerk for recording. The County Clerk erroneously got all of the papers mixed up and the schedule A's were not correct on the deeds. Therefore, when all this got started a couple of months ago we had to do correction deed to put the right schedule A's on the deed. Roberts: Just a question on that. There was a mets and bounds hp�cription going into Capobianco from Cosgrove and that same legal description was used in Capobianco to Capobianco and that was the same legal description by which Dime Savings Bank acquired title. M $kf. Cartularo: Right. n Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 7 Mr. Roberts: So, it was one parcel from the time that it went from Cosgove to Capobianco, Capobianco to Capobianco, and then reacquired by Dime Saving Bank using the same perimeter description. Is that correct? Ms. Cartularo: Right. Mr. Roberts: Then, you said that you picked up two separate parcels. I didn't understand what you meant by that because at that point and time it had been that way since 1987. Ms. Cartularo: Right, but then what they were doing was Spotted Owl was selling the property to the DeCarlo's. That is when the DeCarlo's had a survey done which we took the schedule A from that survey. Mr. Roberts: where did you find a separate parcel? Ms. Cartularo: We found it when we did the search that there was two parcels through the tax maps. Mr. Roberts: The tax maps don't have anything to do with the title. Ms. Cartularo: Well, when you do taxes we had to show two separate -r-reels because we had to show taxes on two separate parcels. i*wr Mr. Roberts: Just stay with the records in the Town Clerks Office. You had to go back to 1964 to find the separate parcel. Is that correct? Ms. Cartularo: Right. Mr. Roberts: That is what we want to clarify. Then, you called Mr. Logan and he indicated that they were two separate grid numbers. Ms. Cartularo: Right. Mr. Roberts: That was done at what time? Ms. Cartularo: What do you mean? Mr. Roberts: When did you call Mr. Logan? Ms. Cartularo: When we were doing the search we had so many descriptions they didn't make .. you know whoever read this didn't think they jived so they went one step further and called the Assessor. Therefore, that is when the Assessor said they were two separate parcels. Therefore, we had to notify the bank and the bank ... two separate parcels and two separate schedule A's. So, we had somebody read it and then make two schedule A's. Mr. Roberts: What bank? . Cartularo: Fleet. Mr. Roberts: What was Fleet's involvement in this transaction? Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 8 . Cartularo: When Mr. Murphy bought the property he used them for a mortgage. They required two separate parcels and two separate schedule A's and that is what we did. Then, Mr. Murphy was selling it to the DeCarlo's, which we again with the title company insured the deed and we insured that they were two separate parcels and that is where it went. Mr. Fanuele: I have a question, what is the date on this map Bill? Do you know the date on this map? Mr. Parsons: No, it is just within the last 12 months. Mr. Fanuele: What is this thing back here? Mr. Parsons: see let me explain it to you. They wanted to realign the property and make it into two entirely different lots. They wanted to draw the line through here, making this house which naturally would end up in Lot A and also they had major concerns about getting a septic system in there because ...... So, they put the septic system in there and they drew a line in here and then made this lot even much smaller. it brought it under half an acre even so they could put a proposed house and septic system there. We turned them down and that is why Mr. Fanuele: This doesn't exist? v-. Parsons: No, not to my knowledge anyway. They supposably on Lot A �Moth the house and possibly they know, but Lot A supposably did something about curing their septic problem. Where their septic is, I don't know. Mr. Roberts: Joel, I just have one other question and then I just want to clarify something. When the property was sold to Mr. DeCarlo there is a reference to an easement, but it doesn't say what the easement is for. it says they may do some shrubs and there is a reference that it may Here it is in the deed dated 2/7/94. Mr. Hanig: They may actually be the easements. I mean I don't have Ito you have a copy of the easements? Mr. Roberts: If you want a copy .. I am just trying .. It says together with an easement and then it describes it. It is almost a quarter of an acre, but then it says he can continue with encroachment. Mr. Hanig: I have a separate easement document that predates DeCarlo. It says 1939602. Mr. Roberts: There was a correction deed, that was in 1965. Is this the one? Mr. Hanig: I don't think so. This is much later. Mr. Roberts: It seems to be the same easement though. . Sasser: on which description Al? Mr. Roberts: on the correction deed dated January 1994 it's contained Joel has it in a different one and it is also in 1939602 n 9 Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 9 Mr. Hanig: Yes, 1939602 and that is dated January 1994 which is a two tenths of an acre easement. Mr. Roberts: .241_ Mr. Hanig: Right. Mr. Roberts: Was that to maintain a septic system? Mr. Hanig: Just for the corner of the garage to meet the offsets. We seem to have a little bit of a recollection problem and this is not me. but it is my clients who went to the Planning Board meeting and their recollection is different from Mr. Parsons recollection. Perhaps the minutes of the Planning Board meeting if they exist would serve to actually confirm what took place at the Planning Board meeting. It is clients recollection that when they went in asking for a lot line realignment they were told that the only way that they could receive a line realignment is if the garage to the house was removed. Their statement is that they could not do that and they could then not go forward witl tl 1 t 1 my lot i �e o ine realignment. That is their recollection as to what they were told. Not you can't do this. Mr. Schwebel: Not that they would give us a lot line realignment if we moved the garage, but that we wouldn't need the lot line realignment if we ;moved the garage and that they were not going to give us a lot line realignment period and then we withdrew the application. Mr. Hanig: There is definitely a difference in recollection as to what happened at that Planning Board meeting and based upon the presentation that was made by Mr. Parsons that I think that this Board should have the minutes of that meeting. Whatever it was when they came before the Planning Board because the history of this lot and to me it is very important that when the house was built on Lot 1 or Lot A it was built at a time when these were in separate ownership. There is no question in my mind in reviewing the deeds and reviewing what I found out about the Assessor's records unless I am wrong that when the house was built on Lot A the person who owned Lot A didn't own Lot B. If they later went out and bought Lot B because they wanted to add property to their ownership it certainly makes a difference because it is not the same thing as if somebody owns Lot A and then says, oh, I better own another lot because I apt going to build and I need more property in order to build. Mr. Fanuele: Let me ask you a question, what happens when you build Lot A and they found out that it is on Lot A and Lot B? Mr. Hanig: There is no question there is a small corner of the garage. Mr. Fanuele: So, they bought Lot B to correct that situation. Hanig: well, I don't know whether that was done under any compulsion kw any Town official or whether or not it was something that was done gratuitously or whether they even knew that their house encroached upon the property line. I think that their is assumptions being made here that unless they are documented within the Town records are assumptions of n Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 10 somebody who may not know and is Just guessing as to why the owner of Lot A bought Lot B. I don't think we are here to guess as to why A bought Lot B. The fact is that the house was built on Lot A. The person later did buy Lot B. There was never a consolidation of those tax lots on the property for whatever reason the Town always maintained separate identities of those tax lots which probably is what added to the confusion that resulted in my clients buying this property. Now, the fact that mg clients bought the property and then decided that it would be presentation to have a lot line realignment because of the configuration of the property and withdrew the application because they found that the Planning Board would not entertain a lot line realignment. That doesn't destroy their ability to come before the Zoning Board of Appeals to ask for relief- Mr. elief. Mr. Sasser: Al, what was the date of the last revision of the ordinance? Mr. Hanig: I think in 1990. Mr. Roberts: 1990. Mr. Sasser: What was the ownership in 1990? Mr. Hanig: Common ownership. . Roberts: Common ownership. I believe the Zoning Ordinance was amended several times. It started in 64. I believe there was an amendment in 70 or 71. There was another one in 78 that was redone in 1980 and then it was redone again in 90. Mr. Sasser: Am I correct Al, the Zoning Ordinance in Section 411 states that at the state of the ordinance if someone owns a undersized lot contiguous with another lot it becomes one lot automatically? Mr. Roberts: That is what it states in the ordinance, yes. Mr. Hanig: If that is what's stated then the Assessor's never followed through and consolidated this lot to make it a single tax lot. That is problematic because that is what wound up causing my clients problem and the fact that these lots were never consolidated for assessment purposes as a single lot. That is why I had the broker come tonight because he doesn't have anything to gain from this. He was there at the meeting when the Zoning Administrator said you can build on the other lot. Mr. Sasser: Al, what is the mechanism that the Town uses to physically combine two lots? Mr. Roberts: I don't know that there has ever been a formal procedure. Certainly, what occurs is the tax grid numbers are assigned by the Real r operty Tax Department in the County based on deed filings. There is a 'partment there that plots out each deed that is recorded and they are assigned tax grid numbers. In this particular case I can't tell you what occurred. Nobody seems to know. I will represent that we did try to find out and there was clearly a perimeter description in 87 given by Cosgrove to Copabianco. For some reason the County Tax Department continued two grid numbers apparently continuously through to present. Nobody knows M L73 why. There is no indication in the file. could find. I think even Mr. Parsons .. TI Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 11 At least there was none that I Mr. Sasser: At this point and time, just for everyone's information, all of our meetings are required to be conducted in public. We can not meet and discuss this in private whatsoever. However, there is an occasion which we can call an Executive Session so we can meet with the Town Attorney with regard to certain matters: personnel matters or matter with litigation with the Town. At this point and time, I would ask that a member of the Board ask for a — Mr. Roberts: I just want Mr. Hanig to understand that I expect that he is going to submit some sort of a legal brief that you want us to consider? Mr. Hanig: Well, before going further I would like to have the minutes of the Planning Board meeting because Mr. Parsons has created an issue. Mr. Sasser: I understand ... Mr. Roberts: You just wanted to talk to me about legal advice? Mr. Sasser: With regard to legal advice. Prager: I make a motion for an Executive Session. Mr. Lehigh: Second. Vote: All ayes. Tare Off/Tape On Mr. Sasser: Can we have a motion to open the public hearing. Mr. Lehigh: So moved. Mr. Prager: Second. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Roberts: Joel, number 1, we agreed that the minutes of the Planning Board should be made part of the record. Secondly, you brought up the issue of the separate grid numbers and if you could supply some ..... as to the impact of the separate grid numbers on the merits of the applicants appeal I think that would be appreciated. I assume that you are going to submit a brief subsequent to the hearing anyway. Mr. Hanig: Not really. I really was not planning to, but it may very well be that we probably might be able to come up with something on -urate grid numbers. We were looking at this with a prospective that we rve an application where there is reliance on the time that they xMrchased the property on statements by a Town official and they went ahead and they did in the reliance on those statements and there is only one way to get relief and that is to come before the Zoning Board where the Town official appears to have been erroneous in his understanding as to the property being separate lots under the Zoning Ordinance because I . rr► rri Wappinaer Zoning board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 12 can read the Zoning Ordinance just as well as anybody else. I don't think Herb Levenson had the right to tell these people that these lots were separate lots under the Zoning Ordinance. He didn't have the right to do that. It is clear to me that 1990 or 1991 ordinance that as a matter of Zoning Law that these lots became combined and lost their identitv as a separate lot. Mr. Sasser: On thing that I do want to see are the minutes that you referred to. ter. Hanig: I would like to see them too. I would like to see the minutes and I would like to hear the tape. Mr. Sasser: Do you know when that occurred? Mr. Hanig: I am sure that they could look in their diaries and come up with the date when they .. Mr. Roberts: There is a Spotted Owl .. Mr. Schwebel: Lands of Schwebel. Mrs. Nguyen: I have the file right here. �. Sasser: I don't think at this point and time we want to take the time to take the minutes out and all of us read it. Mrs. Nguyen: Well, the minutes wouldn't be in here, but this is the Town file- Mr. ile. Mr. Sasser: You can provide copies of those meetings and make sure Mr. Hanig goes over them and they are the ones in question. Mr. Hanig: under these circumstances I would ask that the public hearing be adjourned- Mr. djourned. ter. Sasser: Before we do that we have some other people in the public who may want to speak with regard to this matter. Yes sir, could you just drive its your name and address? Mr. Hover: Yes, my name is John Hover. I am an adjacent property owner. T am the guy just down hill from the lot that you are trying to subdivide. Of course we have been there for 30 vears and we .. quite well. I remembered the time when he said that when they built my garage, the garage was over the property line and I had to buy the two pieces of property. That was back in the mid -sixties. My concerns are a little different. Obviously, they are very simply expressed, where does the water go? It has taken me 10 years to get the water off of my property in the back. If you put a house up there you strip the vegetation off of It property tip there. I want to know not only where the sewage goes ftcause that is a clay bank, our property, I want to know where the water goes and I would like to know how the drainage is going to keep from running over my property. The Town very kindly, when I talked to Graham a couple of years ago after I had my driveway done, put a curb in and it keeps some of the water off. The vegetation up hill keeps the rest of the n NJ 9 Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 14 Mr. Parsons: Then; you can make copies of all of the deeds in that order MIXED DISCUSSION Mr. Sasser: The next item on the agenda tonight is an adjourned public hearing. Appeal 41204 at the request of Rabco Landscaping & Contracting. Inc. (Contract Vendee) who is seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 422.8; paragraph 7, wherein you are not to exceed 2,000 sq. ft. in total area and you are requesting a building of 4,000 sq. ft., plus or minus as well as outside storage for nursery retail sales material on property located on Route 82 and All Angels Hill Road and is identified as Tax Grid #19-6357-03-220050-00 in the Town of Wappinger. We have received a letter from Rabco. They were unprepared to provide us with any of the information that we had requested. They have requested an adjournment of tonights public hearing until September 26th at 7:30 P.M. At that time we will continue the public hearing. In addition I received a letter from the Town Attorney with regard to this matter. I am going to provide the original to Linda so she can make copies and send it to everyone. I don't think it is anything critical. Mr. Lehigh: I make a motion to allow them to have an adjourned hearing for the 26th. Prager: Second. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Sasser: That will be set down for a public hearing for the 26th. The next item on the agenda tonight is for discussion. Joseph Knob, Jerry Nika & Joan Husni to discuss Appeal #1208 requesting a 28 ft. frontyard variance for property located at 95 Osborn Hill Road and a 50 ft. frontyard variance for property located on Osborn. Hill Road -Rear in the Town of Wappinger. Is there someone here representing the applicant? Yes sir, can you tell us your name please? Mr. Knob: Joseph Knob. Mr. Sasser: You are before us looking for two variances tonight Mr. Knob. Did everybody receive the maps? Just so you understand tonight this is not a public hearing. We are not prepared to .. Mr. Knob: That is a tough act to follow. Mr. Sasser: We are not here to really debate the variance, but simply to understand what it is you are looking for so we can determine if there is anything that we are going to need the night we are going to have a public hearing. That way we will understand better what you are looking for and things that we might want you to provide us so we will be clear what you are looking for. We would have it that night and be able to proceed (�ickly and not delay it any longer. It appears you have two lots, am I Z'Srrect? Mr. Knob: Yes. Mr. Sasser: We will call it 800 and 787. 800 has 22 ft. of frontage on 4 Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 15 Osborn Hill Road. The other parcel 787 has no frontage whatsoever, correct? Mr. Knob: Right. Mr. Sasser: And it is on something called Walters Lane. My question is, is Walters Lane a paved road? Mr. Knob: No. Mr. Sasser: It is a dirt road? Mr. Knob: It is a paper road I am told. Mr. Sasser: Nothing existing there now? Mr. Knob: No, there is a house on the back lot though. Mr. Sasser: Which back lot? Mr. Knob: The lot with zero frontage. Mr. Prager: 767? #60 Knob: Yes. Mr. Sasser: Do you have a copy of this map? Mr. Knob: Yes. Mr. Sasser: So, 787 has a house on it now? Mr. Knob: Yes, the house was dilapidated and collapsed. The footing and the foundation is still there. Mr. Sasser: But, nobody is living there? It is not liveable? Mr. Knob: No, at one time I assume it was. Mr. Prager: How do you get there? How do you get to that house? Mr. Knob: You walk into the property from Osborn. Mr. Sasser: Who owns Walters Lane? Mr. Knob: I am not sure how to define that. It is a right-of-way. It is 15 feet wide. MX. Sasser: So, the deed to 787 refers to that. . Knob: Refers to Walters Lane, Mr. Sasser: An access across Walters Lane. Mr. Knob: In fact the deed for both properties c Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 2.9, 1995 Page 16 Mr. Sasser: Is 800 improved? Is there a house on that property? Mr. Knob: No. Meir. Sasser: So, you are looking to be able to build a house on both of these properties? Mfr. Knob: Yes, in fact what we were doing when I bought these properties, I was employed by a computer company up here in the valley and the other one of the gentlemen, Al Husni was also a local resident. Since then I don't work for IBM which is something that there is quite a few of us around apparently. Mr. Husni has relocated to I think North Carolina. We were originally planning on building on these lots ourselves. Mr. Sasser: When did you buy them? Mr. Knob: 1985? This is my wife ,loan by the way. We bought them at two separate times by the way. Mr. Sasser: Oh, you didn't buy them at one time? Mr. Knob: No, we bought them from two different people at two different I" mes . Mr. Sasser: Two different owners? Mr. Knob: Right, at one time I think .. Mfrs. Knob: The 1.3 acre, that is the one bought in 1988. Mr. Knob: 800 was purchased in 1988. Mfrs. Knob: I believe the other one was purchased in 1989. Mr. Sasser: How did you plan on providing access to the properties? Mfr. Knob: Well, first to the 800 lot the 22 ft. that comes in off of Osborn Hill Road and then Walters Lane would provide additional access to the rear lot. Mr. Sasser: The rear lot is the one specifically I am concerned about. I am just curious who is going to take care of the snow? Mr. Knob: That is a private road. It would have to be done by the owners of the lots on either side. Mr. Sasser: How do you propose on requiring the owner to do that? Knob: I own both sides in the back and in the front the fellow that ns 797 does it now. There is a house on 797. We tried to buy that property as well_ Mr. Sasser: O.k., you don't own 797? . S Mr. Knob: Correct. n Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 17 Mr. Sasser: You own only 787 and 800? Mr. Knob: Correct. Mr. Lehigh: Where is 797 driveway, Walters Lane? Mr. Sasser: It comes off of Walters Lane.. Mr. Lehigh: So, Walters Lane is actually a driveway. approved by the the Town or anything else. Mr. Knob: I don't think so, but I don't know. It is not a road Mr. Sasser: I can tell you one thing that I have a serious concern about. I would want you to address in some manner and that is especially 787 and the ability for emergency services to be able to get to that property. That is a definite concern that fire trucks .. Mr. Knob: Well, the deeds around Walters Lane provide right-of-way statements. ^. Lehigh: Did we receive the copies of those? Mr. Sasser: You did provide us with a letter from Gray, Railing & Heinsman which indicates that nobody seems to know who owns Walters Lane. Where does Walters Lane go .. past that property? Mr. Knob: No. Mr. Sasser: It ends. It is a paper road anyway so there is no So, we really don't know how far it goes. Mr. Knob: I don't think .. What is the property behind our lots? Mrs. Knob: That is not buildable. That is what they call ... Mr. Knob: D.E.C. Mr. Lehigh: Is it vacant property? Mr. Knob: It is vacant and it is partial wetland. Before we did anything with this I got a hold of D.E.C. and Pat Visseron who is the agent in that area came over and she walked our property. She defined the wetland boundary, which is quite a ways back from our property. We were comfortable that we were not going to encroach in anyway on that. That is going to have to be restated. Lehigh: You didn't decide to check to see what the Zoning Law was at says you have to have 50 foot frontage on a Town road when you purchased the lots? Mr. Knob: The lot was created around 1960 something. Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 18 Mr. Sasser: I am sure that you all want the deeds to these parcels especially with regard to the right-of-way. Mr. Lehigh: I personally would like to see if there is a possibility of another lot or two in the rear of your lots before you get to the wetlands. I would like to know the distance there and who owns it. Mr. Sasser: We are going to know that shortly anyway because the mailings will be required to go to those owners because they are within 500 feet_ Mrs. Knob: I think it is called Greenfly. Mr. Sasser: Oh; that is Greenfly Swamp. Mr. Lehigh: I would like to look at the site. Mr. Knob: I don't think that anybody is going to be able to build back there. Mr. Sasser: They might not be able to. Linda, I want to find out because I am not certain, again I want to find out what notification requirements they might have with regard to that property that is next to them. I am going to see Al tomorrow, but I think you should put in the minutes that I r"Nn't know who owns the Greenfly swamp. I don't know who controls the ,;reenfly Swamp and I want to make sure that all of the proper notification for your sake and our sake are made, but I would want Al's opinion on that.. Mr. Knob: Well, I sat down with Don Close last week and he told me that he was going to put a note on top of the agenda concurrent to our conversation giving you some input. Mr. Sasser: You may want to follow tip on that. Mr. Knob: Did he? Mrs. Nguyen: Not that I know of. Mr. Knob: Because he and I talked about it. Mr. Sasser: No, I don't think that we got anything with regard to this yet, but again this was just for discussion tonight. Mr. Knob: True, but I have been working on this since last .. I don't know it has been several months. I started with Herb and he said he would walk me through it and he retired. We weren't really rushing to get this thing done. P . Sasser: As you saw from the last case, if you speak with Don Close d you want an opinion from Don Close or whatever you want to submit to W. but unless it is in writing or he is here in person Mr. Knob: When I met with Mark Liebermann, who was the intern inspector, then Don came in and by then we had submitted the request for the variance. So; I sat down with Don and he went through my material and we Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29; 1995 Page 19 discussed what needs to be done and he said o.k. based on our conversation I will draft a short note which I will include into your file and make it available to the Zoning Board of Appeals. I guess other business must have pressed because I guess he didn't get to it. Mr. Lehigh: I would also like to see the Fire Prevention Bureau take a look at that. Mr. Sasser: Well, I don't really know what they are taking a look at right now. We are already being told that there is nothing there_ Mr. Lehigh: Before we make a decision I would like to see them take a look at that driveway_ Mr. Sasser: I am not disagreeing with you. I am just thinking that there is no driveway to look at. So, are they looking at the angle or Mr. Lehigh: Well, there is a driveway in there to a certain degree. Mr. Sasser: No, he was just telling me that there is nothing there. It is a paper road. Mr. Fanuele: I think he is talking about what has to be put there. Vii. Knob: There is a house already on 797. That was a dwelling that was I guess foreclosed for tax purposes. Not foreclosed, but taken for tax purposes and sold at auction. A fella bought it and realized that he had paid to much for it and sold it to a developer or builder by the name of Allan Scott who went in and refurbished that house and made a really nice place out of it. It is a 2 bedroom, single bath and now he rents it out. He tried to sell it, but he couldn't make money on it so he rents it out. It is a legitimate dwelling. Mr. Sasser: Then, his driveway is coming off of Walters Lane and not off of Osborn Hill_ Mr. Knob: Yes, he owns a big chunk on Osborn Hill. Mr. Sasser: How far up does his driveway or his access come up Walters Lane? I am not saying that I disagree. I do think that at some point and time perhaps they should, but until there is a road there to give an opinion on ... Mr. Lehigh: Well, I think they should be there to give an opinion whether there should be a road there or not. That is what I would like to have them say. Mr. Fanuele: What specs. it should be. Lehigh: That is right. I also think we should make a field trip. Mr. Sasser: I think you might be right on this as well. Mr. Lehigh: We certainly don't want to put another hazard in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Fanuele: How wide is Walters Lane? Mr. Knob: 15 feet. Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 2.9, 1995 Page 20 Mr. Sasser: Let's refer this to the FPB to get their opinion on what type of access road if there were a house built back there, that they would want to see. Mr. Lehigh: Actually, you are going to have two houses, because the one house is dilapidated and falling down. So, actually there would be two new and one existing. Mr. Sasser: In addition to that I would also like to find out from the Highway Superintendent what the minimum Town road standard would be for driveways. Not highway, but driveway. MIXED DISCUSSIOB Mr. Sasser: Lets schedule it. I don't think that I need anything else at this point either. We are going to refer to FPB and we are going to refer to the Highway Department and we are going to ask Al for his opinion. We are going to need copies of the deeds. Give them to Linda and she will copies and then provide them to each one of us before the next Vieie'ting. Lets see if we can come up with a mutual acceptable date. Mrs. Knob: You need all of the deeds. I have all of the deeds going all the way back to .. Mr. Sasser: Actually, the only deeds that we need are the last ones when you purchased the property. We don't need the chain behind that. BOARD AGREED TO HAVE A SITE INSPECTION ON 8/31/95. Mr. Sasser: Since this is a gathering of the Board this will be an official meeting there. We are not allowed to again, as I said meet to discuss really what is happening there. It is simply for the preference of us to see what the property looks like and what the roadway looks like, but it will be a meeting and anyone here is welcome to come to that meeting. Something that you should probably be aware of also is that the Zoning Board of Appeals is an appellant. You have been denied the ability to build under the Zoning Ordinance. We are required to listen to what you say and apply 5 very stringent rules. If you meet the majority of those then it is incumbent upon us to give you your approval, to grant it. If you don't then, it is incumbent upon us to say that we can't approve it. Linda, do you have a copy of that? I will provide to Linda tomorrow a copy of .. It is public information. I will give her a copy of what it is that we are going to be applying to what you are telling Consequently, it is in your best interest to know what those things so that you will know what we are trying to decide. Well, you know the Zoning Law ........ there is no frontage to that property and you saw what happened tonight. There is a very valid concern that people that might buy a house on that property ..... They need to have the ability to have ambulance service and fire protection. We don't want this to haunt Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 21 the Town. Tens of thousands of dollars in the future trying to take over a road. Mr. Knob: We have already started testing. We have had the engineers out taking a look at the sewer and the water. Mr. Sasser: Have you really made an effort to find out who owns Walters Lane or what is Walters Lane? I am not quite sure what it even is. Mr. Knob: I went to the Title Co. They gave me a letter. Mr. Sasser: Is that the one we have a copy of? Mr. Knob: I don't think you have it. I just go it just a few days ago. Mr. Sasser: Then again, instead of giving it to us tonight why don't you Mr. Knob: It distinctly says the right-of-way, period. Mr. Fanuele: Yes, but who owns it? The right-of-way has to be owned by snmebody. Knob: Apparently not. I shouldn't say no it doesn't. Mr. Sasser: I can't believe that it goes back to King George. Somewhere along the way someone had to own it. There is nothing filed with ..? Mr. Lehigh: Somebody is paying taxes on it_ Mr. knob: There is no tax map on it per say. Mrs. Knob: I have the whole chain. It goes back to the original filed map and Buckey is the one who had it and it looks to me like Buckey gives 15 feet, I think it is 30 feet by the way not 15 feet. Mr. Sasser: They referred to the left half and the right half of the road.. hers. Knob: I believe the total is 30 feet. Mr. Prager: I have a letter from the engineer. Basically what it is saying is that the distance would be 7.7 on the right-of-way line. So, it sounds like one half. That was a letter to you on April 6th. So, you are talking basically about a 15 foot right-of-way. Mr. Knob: Off of 22 feet that I have- Y-- , Prager: Right. Mr. Sasser: How can you? It is not your property to do that with. Mr. Knob: The 22 feet is,. Mr. Prager: The 22, but not the 15. Mr. Sasser: Mr. Knob: Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 22 On the one lot, but not on the other. I own the property all the way back to the other lot. Mr. Fanuele: Well, you will need to get the approval from this guy. Mr. Knob: I don't need approval from him. MIXED DISCUSSION Mr. Knob: I am asking for a 28 foot variance to avoid that. Mr. Sasser: It is a strange situation that nobody knows the ownership of Walters Lane. Mr. Knob: If you look at this deed and this deed they both refer .. Mr. Sasser: They both have a right-of-way on Walters Lane. Mrs. Knob: All three of these deeds all say this. Mr. Sasser: our concern is that he doesn't have the ability to pave this d or to make it a driveway or to meet any kind of specs. because he %%,oesn't own it, but he does own this piece of property and he could put something in there perhaps granting that this person has access over this property to get out. Mr. Knob: Bob Gray wrote the application. The way that he did it is he asked for a 28 foot variance which kind of steps around the Walters Lane discussion because if you take 22 feet off of 50 that gives you the ability to provide access. I know 22 feet is wide enough_ Mrs. Knob: (Too low to transcribe) Mr. Sasser: Is there anything else that you are going to need? You shouldprobably speak to Mr. Close again. Can I have a Declaration for Lead Agency? Mr. Lehigh: I make a motion that the Zoning Board of Appeals be declared Lead Agency in this case. Mr. Sasser: At this point and time, I think that we should reserve a SEOR decision only because of the fact _. Mr. Prager: I second that. Mr. Fanuele: Before we adjourn it I have a question. . Sasser: We have one more on the agenda. Mr. Fanuele: When are we going to get a copy of the new Zoning Ordinance? Mr. Sasser: I think it just went to the official last week. Mr. Knob you will need to speak with Linda about getting out the proper notice. she7 will guide you in putting out the notices to the property owners. Just Mr. Knob: I don't think I have to provide anything other then what I have already have in hand. Mr. Sasser: We can put it off for the 12th or the 26th. Mr. Knob: The 12th is fine. Mrs. Nguyen: Joel, can I say something? If this has to go before the FPB they meet the second Tuesdav of the month. Mr. Sasser: Yes, we asked for a lot of opinions. The 26th might be better. She has a very good point. Mr. Knob: That is fine. Mr. Sasser: Linda, in your request just mention that we will be meeting the 26th and would like them well before that if possible. Thank you. e next item on the agenda tonight is Ralph & Doreen Aguafredda to discuss Appeal 41209, requesting a variance of 181 sq. ft. for a minimum lot size for an accessory apartment on property located on 117 Edgehill Drive in the Town of Wappinger. It looks like a very minimal variance. We also had recommendation from the Planning Board. What was the variance that you were looking for here'? Mr. Schmitt: 181 sq. ft. Mr. Sasser: There is nothing more that I am going to need. Mr. Prager: Me either. Mr. Sasser: Do you want to set this down for the 26th? Mr. Schmitt: For a public hearing? Mr. Sasser: For a public hearing on the 26th. Mr. Schmitt: It has to go through a public hearing, is that correct? Mr. Sasser: Linda will notify you on how to notify the adjoining properties owners and we will set them down for a public hearing on the 26th - r. Schmitt: Why not for the 12th? Mr. Sasser: Well, we don't have anything else on for that meeting. Mrs. Nguyen: Gasland Petroleum. Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 23 make sure because we are going to get an opinion from the Town Attorney on what special notification with regard to Greenfly Swamp. Just keep in touch with Linda and she will inform you on that. In addition to that I would like to set this down for a public hearing. Is the next meeting going to be time enough for you to do what you need to do? That would be September 12th. Mr. Knob: I don't think I have to provide anything other then what I have already have in hand. Mr. Sasser: We can put it off for the 12th or the 26th. Mr. Knob: The 12th is fine. Mrs. Nguyen: Joel, can I say something? If this has to go before the FPB they meet the second Tuesdav of the month. Mr. Sasser: Yes, we asked for a lot of opinions. The 26th might be better. She has a very good point. Mr. Knob: That is fine. Mr. Sasser: Linda, in your request just mention that we will be meeting the 26th and would like them well before that if possible. Thank you. e next item on the agenda tonight is Ralph & Doreen Aguafredda to discuss Appeal 41209, requesting a variance of 181 sq. ft. for a minimum lot size for an accessory apartment on property located on 117 Edgehill Drive in the Town of Wappinger. It looks like a very minimal variance. We also had recommendation from the Planning Board. What was the variance that you were looking for here'? Mr. Schmitt: 181 sq. ft. Mr. Sasser: There is nothing more that I am going to need. Mr. Prager: Me either. Mr. Sasser: Do you want to set this down for the 26th? Mr. Schmitt: For a public hearing? Mr. Sasser: For a public hearing on the 26th. Mr. Schmitt: It has to go through a public hearing, is that correct? Mr. Sasser: Linda will notify you on how to notify the adjoining properties owners and we will set them down for a public hearing on the 26th - r. Schmitt: Why not for the 12th? Mr. Sasser: Well, we don't have anything else on for that meeting. Mrs. Nguyen: Gasland Petroleum. Wappinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 24 Mr. Sasser: Oh, that is on for discussion? Mrs. Nguyen: Yes. Mr. Sasser: Then the 12th_ Mr. Schmitt: I don't think we have to do anything. I don't think we have to post that like a public hearing for the accessory apartment, do we? Mrs. Nguyen: Yes, it is the same process. Mr. Sasser: There has to be a public hearing and .. Mr. Schmitt: There has to be two public hearings for the same thing because we have to go back to the Planning Board for the accessory apartment? Do we have to have a public hearing? Mr. Sasser: This is completely separate. You have to get a variance for what you are doing there. Does he have to go back to the Planning Board? Mr. Parsons: Can I just give you one quick comment? We sent him to you people because normally we would be against .. We try to make sure at least a half acre with these mother and daughter things because of ereased traffic, cars, people and so on. In this particular case, the ther is living upstairs and will move downstairs and she doesn't drive so there won't be any additional impact at all. So, that is why we made a recommendation. Mr. Sasser: The Zoning Law requires that you have a public hearing with regard to only this matter and nothing else. Mr. Schmitt: O.K. Mr. Sasser: She will give you the information on how to do the mailings and then we will see you on the 12tb. Mr. Schmitt: What is the time frame on that? Mr. Sasser: 7:30. Mr. Schmitt: No, I mean the days of notice. Is it 10 days notice? Mrs. Nguyen: They have to be notified 5 days before the meeting, 7 days all together. Mr. Schmitt: How about the posting of the property? Mrs. Nguyen: I am not sure about that_ Sasser: What do you mean the posting of the property? Mrs. Nguyen: That is for the Planning Board_ Mr. Sasser: All you have to do is with regard to the Z.B.A. Just mail out to anybody who is contiguous within 500 feet. The notice has to he Wal)pinger Zoning Board Minutes - August 29, 1995 Page 25 put in the newspaper. Nothing else with us. We will have a public hearing and we will give you the answer that night. If it is approved I will sign the papers and they will be filed within 5 days Clerk. with the Town Mr. Lehigh: I make a motion that the Zoning Board of Appeals be appointed Lead Agency- Mr. Sasser: No, I think the Planning Board has already declared Lead Agency. We do need SEQR.. Mr. Prager: I make a motion that we declare a Negative Dec. Mr. Lehigh: Second- Mote: All ayes. Mr. Lehigh: I make a motion to adjourn. F°anuele: Second. Vote: All ayes_ TING ADJOURNED AT 9:02 P.M.. Respectfully submitted, KfA . Linda IYgul'en, Secretary Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals