Loading...
2002-02-12 Zoning Board of Appeals February 12, 2002 Summarized Minutes Members Present Mr. Lehigh, Mr. Fanuele, Mr. diPiemo, Mr. Prager, Mr. Warren, MINUTES Chairman Vice Chairman Member Member Member Others Present: Mrs. Lukianoff, Zoning Administrator Mrs. Gale, Secretary SUMMARY Public Hearings: Discussion: Joseph Finnigan David Katz Jeffrey Poorman 'lI"""r",. ,"""': 1-; ~. '., fl;)!"'" . __..."i ~ -.) ~UwL Town of Wappinger Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Variance Granted Variance Granted PH set 2/26/02 Minutes for Site Visits: January 26, 2002 Mr. Prager: Motion to approve Mr. Warren: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye First Item: '-' APPEAL NO. 02-7115 Joseph Finniean - Seeking a variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations for a R-20 Zone. Whereas 10-foot side yard setback is required for structures under 200 sq. ft., applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 3-feet, thus requestine a variance of 7-feet for a 13'6" x 10'5" open wood shed. The property is located at 7 Marlorville Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-01-068673 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Lehigh: Do I hear a motion to open the public hearing? Mr. diPiemo: Motioned to open the public hearing. Mr. Warren: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye Mrs. Finnigan: My husband couldn't be here tonight. Mr. Lehigh: We came out and looked at your situation, and my personal feelings with the fence around it, I didn't see a problem with it. '-" Mrs. Finnigan:It's a beautiful wood shed. Mr. Lehigh: Ifwe OK'd that variance for you have that wood shed, I would put in the variance to maintain that fence, as long as the shed is there. Mr. Prager: I feel the same way, I noticed it's not any higher than the fence, you can't see it from the neighbors' - there's really not too much of an area you could put it, normally with a variance that size I'm not in favor of them. Mr. Fanuele: As long as the fence stays there..... Mr. Lehigh: So if you every decide to give up the wood, I'd like to see that shed come down. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this variance? (No response) ~ 2 '-' Mr. Lehigh: Since we declared ourselves Lead Agency, but we didn't do the NEG DEC - could we do that? Mr. Prager: I make a motion for NEG DEC Mr. Warren: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye Mr. Lehigh: Could we have a motion to close the public hearing? Mr. Fanuele: So moved Mr. Prager: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye "-' Mr. Lehigh: I would like to make a motion that the variance be granted and stipulate that the requested variance will not produce and undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, no substantial deterrent will be created to nearby properties and there are no other feasible methods available for you to achieve the benefit you seek other than the requested variance. The requested area variance is substantial, but you have the fence to hide it, the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact of the physical or environmental conditions of the district. Alleged difficulty is self-created, since you made the shed, but I make a motion that we grant the variance. Mr. Prager: I'll second - and I believe you also wanted the stipulation about - ifit's no longer of use to remove it, and keep the fence in place. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Warren - Granted Mr. diPierno - Granted Mr. Prager - Granted Mr. Fanuele - Granted Mr. Lehigh - Granted '-" 3 4 Next Appeal: '-' APPEAL NO. 02-7114 David & Debra Katz - Seeking a variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations for an R40/80 Zone - Whereas 50-feet rear yard setback is required, applicant is proposing 27 feet. thus requestine a variance of 23 feet to have a deck remain where it is. And whereas 25- feet is required for side yard setback, applicant is proposing a side yard setback of20-feet, thus requestine a variance of5-feet to have same deck remain where it is. The property is located at 106 Chelsea Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-03-367471 in the Town of Wappinger. APPEAL NO. 02-7116 David & Debra Katz - Seeking a area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations, to construct a 20' x 32'in eround 0001- Whereas 50 ft. rear yard setback is required, the applicants are oroposine a rear yard setback of 36 ft. thus requesting! variance of 14 ft. The property is located at 106 Chelsea Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-03-367471 in the Town of Wappinger. '-' APPEAL NO. 02-7117 Variance #1 David & Debra Katz - Also seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in R-40/80 Zoning District. Whereas front yard setback of75 feet is required from a County road to construct a 8' x 32' porch, applicants are proposing a 70 ft. front yard setback. thus requestine a variance of 5 ft. The property is located at 106 Chelsea Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-03-367471 in the Town of Wappinger. Variance #2 David & Debra Katz - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulation in R-40/80 Zoning District. Whereas front yard setback of 75 feet is required from a County road to construct a 26' x 26' two car 2:ara~e, applicants are proposing a front vard setback of 58.5 ft.. thus requestine a variance of 16.5 ft. The property is located at 106 Chelsea Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-03-367471 in the Town of Wappinger. '-" 5 '-' Mr. Lehigh: I'd like to handle them all together, we opened and do we need more discussion or is there anything else on it? Mr. Katz: I don't have anything unless you have a particular question. Mr. Lehigh: We came down and looked at it, we looked at the whole project is a rather large project with quite a few variances. When I came and looked at it - I didn't see another way to do what you wanted to do, and I didn't feel myself that it would bother anybody else. Let's open it to the Board. Mr. Prager: The only question I have - is there any way of - and I'm talking about Appeal 7114 which is the appeal for the existing deck - is there anyway - I know before it looks like to needed it to get to the pool - do need all that room going out towards the back even if the pool isn't there now. Mr. Katz: Actually, I don't - there's a section on grade there, certainly a portion of that really isn't necessary - and actually it was all done together for a permit so we put it in because it was standing, so I don't know that I would have an objection to.... '--' Mr. Prager: The only reason I say that is - because it is like 46% when you have that large - if there's a way you could cut it down, maybe tell us how much you could cut it down, tonight.. . and I'd feel a little better about that. Mr. Katz: I could take all that off of the old pool, because that's coming down so that's quite a bit of decking, that's what - 30' x 10' or 30' x 8'. Mr. Prager: So you'll be removing how many feet towards the house then? Mr. Katz: Another 8 or 10 feet towards the house. Mr. Prager: So in other words, you be able to provide 37 feet instead of... Mr. Schmidt: We asked for 36' for the pool, so maybe for simplistics, to keep it the same, would that be ok? Mr. Prager: OK, so instead of the 27' Mr. Prager and Mr. Katz continued to discuss the possibility of changing the stairs. Mr. Katz: You would have to rebuild the whole thing, if I had to I would. Mr. Prager: I just wanted to know ifit's possible. '-' 6 Mr. Fanuele: The question I have - did you redesign the septic? '-' Mr. Schmidt: Yes Mr. Fanuele: Did you get the approval? Mr. Katz: Yes Mr. Schmidt: We'll have to get a copy to each of you and put in the records. Mr. Lehigh: Do you have anything else, Vic? Mr. Fenuele: No, just the septic, ifthe septic got the approval, then they can put the pool in. Mr. Lehigh: Is there anybody else from the audience that has anything they want to say in this matter? (No response) Mr. Lehigh: OK - we're taking it all together as one package, so I'd like a motion for a NEG DEC. Mr. Fanuele: So be it ~ Mr. Warren: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye Mr. Prager: Motion to close the public hearing Mr. diPiemo: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye Mr. Fanuele: I make a motion that we grant the variance. ~ 7 '-" Mr. Lehigh: I would like to add to that the requested variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, no substantial detriment will be created to nearby properties and there are no other feasible methods available for you to achieve the benefit you seek other than the requested variances. The requested area variance is substantial, the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact of the physical or environmental conditions of the district. Alleged difficulty is self-created, I feel by the shape of the lot, being long, and not deep enough - that has caused a lot of your problems, and that was the reason that I would vote for it. Roll Call Vote: Mr. Warren - Granted Mr. diPierno - Granted Mr. Prager - Granted Mr. Fanue1e - Granted Mr. Lehigh - Granted '--' '-" 8 Next Item for Discussion: ~ APPEAL No. 02-7118 Mr. Jeffrev Poorman - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in R-40 Zoning District. Whereas a side yard setback of25 feet is required, applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 10ft. 6 inches to construct a bi-Ievel open wood deck. thus reQuestine a variance of 14ft. 6 inches. The property is located at 17 Gold Rd. and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-872481 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Lehigh: This is just a work shop, we like to go over, to see what you are looking for. Tell us why you need this. Mr. Poorman: The reason I'm requesting it is - if you look at the survey map, I guess the house has been grandfather'd in to the property line. The house itself it 6' 6" from the existing property line right now, the deck that was up there, that Ire-did - was actually on the edge of the house - I moved it in another 6 ft. maybe 5 ft. Mr. Lehigh: Did you have a variance for that in the first place? Mr. Poorman: For the house? I bought the house as is. '-' Mr. Fanuele: When was the house built? Mr. Poorman: 1963 (Board members - that pre-dates Zoning) Mr. Prager: You purchased it - when? Mr. Poorman: I purchased it in 1991 Mr. Lehigh: Actually, the house is non-conforming to start with, and you moved the deck in 6 ft.? Mr. Poorman: About 5 almost 6 ft., yes. Mr. Lehigh: Any you put a new deck on - this variance is for an existing deck? Mr. Poorman: Yes Mr. Lehigh: The pool has been removed? Mr. Poorman: The pool has been removed, yes. '-" Mr. Fanuele: The deck is behind the house? '-" Mr. Poorman: Correct Mr. Prager: What's the size of the deck? Mr. Poorman: The upper deck is 18 x 20, there's a one step down to a lower deck which is 16 x 16 octagon, right between where the old pool was and deck is now is where the septic system sits. Mr. Lehigh: Your septic system is where the pool used to be? Mr. Poorman: No, it's between where the pool used to be and where the deck is now. Mr. Lehigh: I think we'd like to come out and take a look at that. Mr. Poorman: Certainly, and where the old deck was before I took it down, you couldn't even get a lawn mower between his fence and the deck. Mr. Fanuele: The old deck is gone? Mr. Poorman: The old deck is gone. ~ Mr. Fanuele: The double deck is the new one. Mr. Poorman: Correct Mr. Lehigh: I assuming this probably pre-dated zoning and they have nothing on it. Mrs. Lukianoff: Correct Mr. Lehigh: I'd like a motion to be named Lead Agency Mr. Prager: So moved Mr. diPiemo: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye '-' 9 '-' Mr. Lehigh: I'd like to hold of on the NEG DEC, until we meet for the public hearing, schedule site inspection for Saturday at 9:00AM We'll schedule the public hearing for February 26,2002. Mr. Prager: Motioned to adjourn meeting. Mr. diPierno: Second All in favor - all present voted - Aye Meeting ended: 8:00PM Respectfully Submitted, '-' ~-'~U4 0. o!I~ Michelle D. Gale Secretary - Zoning Board of Appeals '-" 10