Loading...
1992-05-12r. - ice,' 11%W Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 12, 1992 Minutes - 7:30 P.M. Present Mr. Sasser, Chairman Mr. Lehigh, Member Absent Mr. Brooker, Member Others Present Page 1 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Mr. Hirkala, Vice Chairman Mr. Bitterlich, Member Mr. Levenson, Zoning Administrator Mrs. Hardisty, Secretary to the Zoning Board Meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. MFPMMWN@ JUN 0 9. 92 ZONING BOARD Of APPEALS PLANNING BOARD Mr. Sasser: First item on the agenda tonight is the minutes of April 14, 1992. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to approve the minutes as read. avMr. Hirkala: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Mr. Sasser: The first public hearing on the agenda tonight. Appeal 41131 - At the request of Stephen Teed ( Contract Vendee Cimtech CorTA seeking a variance of Article IV Section 422 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 100 foot frontage, and your proposal is showing 75 foot frontage. Therefore requiring a variance of 25 feet, on property located on Airport Drive and being parcel #6259-04-679493 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Larry Paggi and Mr. Teed were present. Mr. Levenson: Mr. Chairman, I would like to state for the record that the Planning Board has reviewed this in great detail, and I believe you have a let- ter from me from the Planning Board, stating that they recommend that you grant this variance (letter dated April 8, 1992 on file). Also for the record all three cases have been properly advertised and notices were sent out. Mr. Sasser: Can I have a motion.to accept proof of publication. Mr. Hirkala: So moved. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded Page 2 Vote: All ayes. I 0 Motion carried. Mr. Sasser: Does the Board have any questions, of Mr. Paggi. We did receive some extensive information on this. There is a full EAF included. Mr. Hirkala: Correct me if I am wrong, the reason for this, the Planning Boards request is that the parking be in the back of the building? Mr. Paggi: I don't know if they requested that, they favored that. Mr. Levenson: They favored that and Mr. Hirkala, you should understand that we had this building laying straight. Mr. Paggi, redid this drawing so that it is on an angle. So that it is better configured on the lot, and we have a better access for handicap parking. You know what subdivision this is in don't you? Mr. Hirkala: Yes. This building is it for the soul purpose of Cimtech, or is it going to be some office there and some here? Mr. Paggi: No, at this time it is for the soul purpose of Cimtech. Mr. Teed: Basically the plan is to run a design shop, which is office computer that would be upstairs, the bottom would be a pro -to shop. *AWT'here was a discussion on what they do. Mr. Hirkala: For future expansion of the business if any, would there be any enviornmental impact on the..site for any of the work you do? Mr. Teed: I don't understand. Mr. Hirkala: I didn't realize you had a machine shop in the operation. Mr. Teed: No, it is not really that, it is going to be a model shop. Mr. Hirkala: Ok, no production. Do you have any plans right now for the future to expand anything over to the east? Mr. Teed: I only want to get through this. Mr. Hirkala: The reason I am asking that is because there is a large portion of this that is empty. There was a discussion on this. Mr. Hirkala: So the chances of it being utilities for further expansion is minimal? Mr. Teed: No, I wouldn't say that, I don't see, if that happens that would all come up again here. Before you again. Mr. Hirkala: No problem there, but what I am talking about, is the fact that I would like to deal with it now, not later. Page 3 Mr. Teed: That is exactly why I respond no right away, because I want to know everybody's feelings on that to. It is a large piece of property. Mr. Sasser: I would like to say for the record with regard to the instant matter we have now, I am very much in favor, and I think that it is terrific that the parking has been put in the back instead of the front. That is the way I believe we should go, on lots of these things that are coming before us. We are being encouraged by the Planning Board Federation and by the county and lots of people to encourage this kind of development instead of putting it in the front. Mr. Hirkala: This has been an on going thing in this Town for years, this is nothing new. There was then a discussion on this, and the future development of the prop- erty. Mr. Teed: I have no plans at this time for future development. There was then a discussion on the property, wetlands, parking, drainage and detention. Mr. Sasser: One of the concerns that I have and the reason I keep, I am press- ing on this, as you know, to get an area variance granted you have to not be ible to do this any other way. And the point that I am trying to get at is you ''need this area currently, as you have it designed for detention, and you could not put parking there. Mr. Paggi: I don't think we could say that. Mr. Hirkala: What your plan shows here is the fact that you are looking into the future for possibility of using more of the site for business. Mr. Paggi: I think that it -may be a fair statement that even if the building was over there that we would still need a variance. There was a discussion on this, the size of the property, the shape of the property and parking. Mr. Paggi: I agree with Mike if we had to design this thing to spec, we could, but it would be a much less desirable plan. Mr. Lehigh: On your SEQRA statement it says number of jobs created during construction 10? Mr. Paggi: That is just for the construction of the building. Mr. Lehigh: It says after project completed, it says zero. You are not going to have any employees there? I consider that a mistake on the SEQRA form. I am not holding that against them, what I want to know is how many are you having. 11% Mr. Teed: 13 employees. Mr. Lehigh: On number 11, proposed action will create a demand for any commu- Page 4 unity provided services, recreation, education, police and fire protection. You marked yes, I am assuming fire protection. Has this been in front of the Fire Prevention Bureau? Mr. Levenson: O, sure. Mr. Lehigh: Do they have any suggestions for us? Mr. Levenson: No suggestions at all. They signed the job off right a way. Mr. Lehigh: My third comment is, the maximum height of the building is 35 feet? Mr. Paggi: By zoning, that is our maximum. Mr. Lehigh: What is the height of the building going to be I don't see it on the plans. Mr. Paggi: At the time we developed this plan we didn't know that, but since architectural have been done, we are looking at about 24 feet. Mr. Lehigh: The reason I am asking that is because of the airport. Mr. Levenson: I address that with the FAA, I called them and told them that we were contemplating a building under 30 feet and they said don't even send the papers into us. Mr. Sasser: I would like to open the public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak for or against this project? Mr. Bitterlich: Made a motion to close the public hearing because there was no one to speak. Mr. Lehigh: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Lehigh: In view of the positive deck forms, I move for a Negative Declara- tion. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Bitterlich: Made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Hirkala: Seconded. Vote: Mr. Lehigh: For. Mr. Hirkala: aye Mr. Bitterlich: For Mr. Sasser: aye w Mr. Hirkala: The justification is the shape of the lot, there is a practical i difficulty. Mr. Sasser: I believe as well, that he has met the criteria for practical difficulty. r-- . Page 5 ,%W Mr. Bitterlich: I would like that in the record as well. Mr. Sasser: The second item on the agenda tonight is Apueal #1132 - At the request of Mr. & Mrs. Pucherelli, seeking a variance of Article IV Section 421 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 25 foot rear yard and you are showing a deck 15 feet from the rear yard, requiring a 10 foot variance, on property located at 51 Fieldstone Blvd. and being parcel #6257-06-323758 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Pucherelli was present. Mr. Sasser: I would just like to state for the record, that Mr. Bitterlich and I and Mr. Levenson, performed a site inspection. The irregular shape of this lot is such, that if he conforms to the Ordinance, he would only be allowed to come two feet from his sliding glass door. Mr. Levenson: I think that the record should state that everyone of those unit that were built, were built with sliding glass doors and no decks. Mr. Sasser: I would like to make a point that he is allowed by the ordinance that he is allowed two feet. Mr. Hirkala: What I want to know is, Fieldstone Blvd. that is a Conservation �kwsubdivision? Mr. Levenson: Right. Mr. Hirkala: Under the approval of the Town Board for Conservation subdivisions is there any rear set backs requirements. Because we have been before deck situations there before. Mr. Levenson: 25 feet is allowed in the covenant of the deed. There was a discussion on this. Mr. Hirkala: So he has to be 25 feet from the rear set back, based upon what the deed says. Mr. Levenson: Yes, but there has been all kinds of variances granted there. There must be, I would say there is at least 70 to 75% of those homes all have decks on them. Mr. Hirkala: Do they all have variances on them, because I don't recall anymore than one or two of them coming in. One was a back yard that was almost under- water. So they needed it because they had no back yard. The other one was encroached in the Conservation area with a garden and everything else. Mr. Levenson: What we are doing on the computer to get a read out of all the decks on Fieldstone Blvd. Mr. Hirkala: I wouldn't be surprised if every one of them is illegal. Mr. Levenson: You have someone that is coming clean with you. Page 6 `W Mr. Lehigh: This is already built right? Mr. Levenson: Yes. There was then a discussion of how he came in for this variance. He was moving and needed a C of O for the deck. Mr. Hirkala: I find it very difficult, and this is nothing personal to you, but that Fieldstone Blvd. is attached houses, smaller lots, Conservation sub- division which is unique, it is different from any other variance request we get, because of the smallness of the lots. And I would find it very hard pressed, unless there was a very good reason for it. Mr. Sasser: There is something I want to tell you Mike, it is a little bit different, and you might not know unless you see this lot. If you look at his map, the rear of the lot is a Conservation District, what that is however is approximately and I am guessing a 10 to 15 foot stretch of field and then another lot identical to this one behind it. It looks like an alleyway between these units. There was a discussion on this. Mr. Levenson: There is no fight about who is going to use it, the only people that can use this according to the deeds, this Conservation District, all the %land in the Conservation District belongs to the Town of Wappinger. so nobody "'can infringe on it. Mr. Hirkala: But they do that is my point, you can't watch everybody. Mr. Levenson: Where we catch them we tell them to stay out. Mr. Hirkala: How far from the rear lot line is it? Mr. Levenson: 15 feet. Mr. Sasser: If there was ever a case of practical difficulty that I've seen this is the most clear cut. He has only 2 feet that he is able to use of his back yard, with a sliding glass door, which is 5 feet up in the air. Mr. Hirkala: This is something that nobody mentioned before. Mr. Lehigh: Asked the applicant what the cost of the deck was. Mr. Pucherelli: About $700.00 dollars, in material. Mr. Bitterlich: He couldn't even put a staircase out his back door. There was further discussion on this and the fact that the deck was already there. V*.,,Mr. Pucherelli: Can I make a statement? Back in 85 when I was putting the deck up, I did go to the Town Building Department, when it was in the village, and I wanted to see if I needed a permit. And when I explained that it was being built on cinder blocks, they told me, since it was on cinder blocks we don't consider this as permanent, you don't need a permit. Page 7 ' There was a discussion on this. Mr. Classey, told Mr. Pucherelli, what he would have to do to bring this deck up to compliance. Mr. Sasser: Lets have one conversation at a time please. There was a discussion on why these units received C of Os with a 5 foot drop and sliding glass doors. Mr. Sasser: Does the Board have anymore questions? I would like to open the public hearing. Can I have a motion to open the public hearing. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to open the public hearing. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Mr. Sasser: Is there anyone here that would like to speak on this matter? Let the record show there was no one here to speak for or against, can I have a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Hirkala: Seconded. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to declare a Negative Declaration. *✓'Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to grant the variance, that he has proved the hard- ship, I don't think they should have ever been built with only a allowance of 2 feet out the back, I think that was a mistake, and I am not going to say who made the mistake, but I think it was a mistake, the man has $700.00 dollars of materials and labor in this. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Lehigh: aye Mr. Bitterlich: aye Mr. Hirkala: aye Mr. Sasser: aye Mr. Hirkala: I am going to vote yes, for one reason only, and I want this in the record. This is not a prescient, it is only the fact that I know Dan Kriegsman. It is the only reason that I am voting yes on this, because I know the guy you said you talked to, and I know that exactly what you said, he said is exactly possible. Mr. Sasser: Yes, I believe that the shape of this lot and his problem with the 5 foot drop is a hardship. Mr. Levenson: Might I just add that Mr. Pucherelli will have to conform to the .Building Inspectors requirements. Mr. Sasser: Would you please let the record show that I am now excusing myself form this meeting and turning it over to Mr. Hirkala. Page 8 *"'Mr. Levenson: What about a motion to hold this case over. Mr. Sasser: Herb, I've been meaning to say to you, would you please only speak when a question is directed to you. Mr. Levenson: Mr. Chairman, for the record, this case has been properly adver- tised and we have received all the notices back. Mr. Hirkala: The case hasn't been read yet. Appeal #1133 - At the request of Mr. & Mrs A Amendola Steven Amendola & Mr. Joel Sasser, seeking a variance of Article IV Section 421.6 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 50 foot front yard and your proposal shows'a 30 foot front yard therefore requiring a 20 foot variance, on property located at 122 Diddell Road, and being parcel ##6359-04-526478 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Sasser, was present. Mr. Lehigh: It states in your letter, that there is currently a building permit issued to allow a 2 car garage constructed in the basement area on the right side of this house. I looked at the drawing and the right side of the house has no driveway or anything else coming to it? *4rMr. Sasser: Not currently, that is being planned to go in there. Mr. Lehigh: On the right side. Mr. Sasser: That is correct. Mr. Lehigh: The driveway is on the left? Mr. Sasser: No. He then explained pointing to the drawing where the driveway would be. Mr. Hirkala: What is on this plan is the existing driveway? Mr. Sasser: Yes. My request for the variance really is only regarding the free standing garage, no variance is required for the other driveway. Mr. Lehigh: You stated here that you don't have the room under the house for the two car garage? Mr. Sasser: That is correct, the basement is only located under this half of the house, this is a crawl, this is a legal two family. Mr. Hirkala: You don't have any garage under there now? Mr. Sasser: Correct. 11%'Mr. Hirkala And you want to but a garage in? Mr. Sasser: Correct. .. ... ... .. .. v. d .. ..t r a.r .. .. �. w.. r�..r. �. .. 1 .,. ,. ...�: S.M. ..r .. ._ _.. .. 16 Page 9 %w Mr. Lehigh: Storage plus cars, and there is no place else on that property that you can put it without causing a problem? Mr. Sasser: There is no other place. There was a discussion on the property, there was a pond on the property and a drop, so this was the only place to put this. Mr. Bitterlich: If I can bring it up to the Board, there is a letter that's been received from Mr. & Mrs. Bertolino, regarding this zoning request. I went out and looked at the property and the comment that is made in this letter, that there really isn't any other place to put this garage is a fact. I looked around and I couldn't figure any other place to put this garage other then where it is shown here on this plan. For the record I think that this letter should be made part of the record, and I agree sincerely with the comments that there is no other place to put it. There was further discussion on the property, which was on a hill, and the excavation that would be done. Mr. Hirkala: What you are trying to do is set up a garage for each apartment? Mr. Sasser: Exactly right. Mr. Lehigh: You said that notices had been published on all three public hear- ings, and we have nobody here. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to open the public hearing. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Hirkala: For the record there is nobody here to speak for or against this the room is empty. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion for a Negative Declaration. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. i Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion that the variance be granted, due to the conformity of the lot, and the location for the two car garage is the only practical i ,,,,,location on.. the lot. Mr. Bitterlich: I will second that. Mr. Hirkala: All in favor? Do we need a roll call vote on that? M Mr. and Mrs. Michael Bertolino 118 Diddell Road Wappingers Falls, N.Y. 12590 May 4, 1992 Town of Wappinger Zoning Administrator 20 Middlebush Road Wappingers Falls, New York 12590 Dear Zoning Board, I am writing this letter to show our support for Mr. Sasser's zoning variance request. We have been neighbors of the Sasser family for several years. During that time, they have made dramatic improvements to the neighborhood and the property. Even tholgh the house is two family, they have made improvements and changes in such a way that it looks like a single family home. They have changed what was once a plain, simple ranch I%W house into a gorgeous home that is an attraction and benefit to the entire neighborhood and has very definitely improved the value of surrounding homes. The grounds are manicured and pristine and the house is one of the nicest in the neighborhood. The garage that they are planning is one that would also look great in the neighborhood and improve the area. There is really no other place to put it other than in the front like they have planned and we have no objection to it at all. I would urge your approval of the variance. Sincerely, Mrs. Denise Bertolino Mr. Michael Bertolino Page 10 Mr. Levenson: No, it would have to be all aye because only three of you sit- ting. Vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Mr. Levenson: I have one thing just a suggestion. That this Board should con- sider, the Planning Board is going to consider starting meetings at 7: P.M. There was a discussion on this and the Board felt that this would cause some problem with some of the Members getting here on time. The Board wanted the meeting to start at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Lehigh: Made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Bitterlich: Seconded. Vote: All ayes. Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 P.M. Very respectfully yours, 4Gyy nn Hardisty, Secretar Zoning Board of Appeals. KR R n Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 12, 1992 Agenda - 7:30 P.M. - Amended 1. Approval of minutes of April 14, 1992. Public Hearings Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, N.Y 1. Appeal # 1131 - At the request of Stephen Teed (Contract Vendee, Cimtech Corp.). seeking a variance of Article IV section 422 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 100 foot frontage, and your proposal is showing 75 foot frontage. Therefore requiring a variance of 25 feet, on property located on Airport Drive and being parcel # 6259-04-679493 in the Town of Wappinger. 2. Appeal # 1132- At the request of Mr. & Mrs. PuC nKalli., seeking a variance of Article IV Section 421 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 25 foot rear yard and you are showing a deck 15 feet from the rear yard, requiring a 10 foot variance, on property located at 51 Fieldstone Blvd. and being parcel # 6257-06-323758 in the Town of Wappinger. %Aw 3. Appeal 4 1133 - At the request ,of Mr. & Mrs. A. mendola, stt?yan Amendola <<. Mr. ,Toes. Sasser, seeking a variance of Article .iV Section 421.6 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law, where you are required to maintain a 50 foot front yard and your proposal shows a 30 foot front yard therefore requiring a 20 foot variance, on property located at 122 Diddell Road, and being parcel ;# 6359-04-526478 in the Town of Wappinger.