Loading...
2007-05-08 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 8, 2007 Amended on Mav 3, 2007 -." Agenda Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING DATE: May 8, 2007 TIME: 7:30 PM Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Approve minutes for April 24, 2007. Approve minutes for May 2, 2007. Approve site minutes for April 28, 2007. Public Hearing: Appeal No. 07-7342 Michael & Christine McGuiean- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R -15 Zoning District. -Where a rear yard setback of 30 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposine a rear yard setback of 20' 8". to allow for a 21 foot above ground pool, thus reauestine a variance of 9'4". The property is located at 99 Ardmore Drive and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-03-286415 in the Town of Wappinger. Discussions: ...... Appeal No. 06-7333- Jeffrey Strane - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 and Section 240-107B (2) (b) [2] of District Zoning Regulations for HB Zoning. 1. -Where 2 acres are reauired, the applicant is proposing 1.78 acres to allow for a mix of commercial and multi-family housine. thus reauestine a variance of .22 acres. 2. -Where a lot depth of 200 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a lot depth of 107.8 feet to allow for a pre-existine condition. thus reauestine a variance of 92.2 feet. 3.-Where 50 feet from the from the front line of other street (Town Road) is reauired. the applicant can provide 7.9 feet, thus reauestine a variance of 42.1 feet for a front yard setback. 4.-Where a rear yard setback of 30 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposine a rear yard setback of 13 feet. to allow for the proposed design, thus reauestine a variance of 17 feet. The property is located between Old State Road and Old Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-580777/581803 in the Town of Wappinger. ( Public Hearing closed on February 13, 2007, Expires Apri1l6, 2007. Applicant granted a 60 day extension to June 15, 2007.) Appeal No. 07-7344 Michael Mirsky - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 of District Zoning Regulations for R- 20 Zoning. -Where a rear yard setback of 40 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 10 feet to allow for a 24' above eround pool. thus reauestine a variance of 30 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 20 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 13 feet to allow for a 24' above eround pool. thus reauestine a variance of 7 feet. ..... 1 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 8, 2007 ~ -Where a side vard setback of 20 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side vard setback of 8 feet to allow for a 24' above e:round 0001. thus reQuestine: a variance of 12 feet. The property is located at 25 Bell Air Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-952783 in the Town of Wappinger. Aooeal No. 06-7340 Brian & Irene Moodv - Seeking a Use Variance of Section 240-37 in the District Zoning Regulations for an R-40/80 Zoning District. Applicant is seeking a Use Variance for the continuance of a pre-existing non-conforming use as a two-family residence where only single family residences are permitted. The property is located 29 Middlebush Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-01-394824 in the Town of Wappinger. ~ 07-7343 Dell Waooine:er FaIls Tovota - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 of District Zoning Regulations for HB Zoning. Where 10 feet is the maximum heie:ht allowed for a freestandine: sie:n, the applicant is proposing a sign with the height of 14 feet, thus reQuestine: a 4 foot variance from Section 240- 29(F)(2)(a) of the code of the Town of Wappinger. Where such sie:n shall not exceed two square feet for each linear foot of building length facing the street or 25 square feet, whichever is smaller, the aoolicant is orooosine: a sie:n of 112 SQ. ft.. thus reQuestine: a variance of 87 SQ. ft. from Section 240-29(F)(2)(a) of the code of the Town of Wappinger. The property is located at 1349 Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-585606 in the Town of Wappinger. ~ 2 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals \.- MINUTES Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 8, 2007 Summarized Minutes Members: Mr. Fanuele, Mr. DellaCorte, Mr. Prager, Ms. McEvoy-Riley Others Present: Mr. Caviglia, Mrs. Lukianoff, Mrs. Roberti, Page 1 Chairman Member Vice-Chairman Member Minutes of May 8, 2007 MINUTES APPROVED ,.."~ . j 2 G 2nD? Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Special Counsel Zoning Administrator Secretary '- SUMMARY Public Hearines: Michael & Christine McGuigan Discussions: Jeffrey Strang Michael Mirsky Brian & Irene Moody DCH Wappinger Toyota \..,.. -Granted Variance. -Accepted 60 day extension to August 14, 2007 for the closed Public Hearing. -Public Hearing on May 30,2007. -Discussion on May 30, 2007. -Discussion on May 30, 2007. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ~ Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Page 2 Minutes of May 8, 2007 Motion to approve the minutes for April 24, 2007. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve the minutes for May 2, 2007. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve the site minutes for April 28, 2007. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 07-7342 Michael & Christine McGuh!an- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R -15 Zoning District. -Where a rear yard setback of 30 feet is reouired, the applicant is proposine: a rear yard setback of 20' 8". to allow for a 21 foot above ground pool, thus reouestine: a variance of 9'4". The property is located at 99 Ardmore Drive and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-03-286415 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Prager: Mrs. Roberti: '--' Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Fanuele: Mrs. McGuigan: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. McGuigan: Mr. Fanuele: Mrs. McGuigan: Mr. Fanuele: \... Barbara are the mailings in order? Yes they are. Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Swore in the applicants. We are looking to put in a 21 foot above ground pool but because of the slope of our rear yard we rally can't move it closer to the home. Your rear yard faces Old Hopewell Road and on our site visit I noticed that you are putting in a Stockade fence. I'm extending down the side and across the back for privacy and safety. Your land slopes and you will need to dig it out for the pool which may make the pool lower on one side so you better check with the building department before starting. The contractor will be digging it out about four feet past the pool for safety. Check with the building department before starting anyway. Is there anyone in the audience with a question or comment? Hearing none. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ~ Mr. Prager: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Vote: Mr. Prager: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Roll Call: Mr. McGuigan: Page 3 Minutes of May 8, 2007 Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to grant the variance. This will not be detrimental to the neighborhood and it won't change the character of the neighborhood. I don't see any alternatives and the variance is not substantial although it is self-created. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. Aooeal No. 06-7333- Jeffrey Strane: - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 and Section 240-107B (2) (b) [2] of District Zoning Regulations for HB Zoning. 1. -Where 2 acres are reauired, the applicant is proposing 1.78 acres to allow for a mix of commercial and multi-family housine:. thus reauestine: a variance of .22 acres. 2. -Where a lot deoth of 200 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a lot deoth of 107.8 feet to allow for a ore-existine: condition. thus reauestine: a variance of 92.2 feet. 3.-Where 50 feet from the from the front line of other street (Town Road) is reauired. the a))olicant can orovide 7.9 feet, thus reauestine: a variance of 42.1 feet for a front yard setback. 4.-Where a rear yard setback of 30 feet is reauired, the applicant is orooosine: a rear yard setback of 13 feet. to allow for the proposed design, thus reauestine: a variance of 17 feet. The property is located between Old State Road and Old Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-580777/581803 in the Town of Wappinger. ( Public Hearing closed on February 13, 2007, Expires Apri116, 2007. Applicant granted a 60 day extension to June 15, 2007.) ~ Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: The applicant has sent in a letter granting us an additional 60 day extension for the closed public hearing to August 14, 2007. Motion to accept the 60 day extension. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Aooeal No. 07-7344 Michael Mirsky - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 of District Zoning Regulations for R-20 Zoning. -Where a rear yard setback of 40 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 10 feet to allow for a 24' above 2round 0001. thus reauestine: a variance of 30 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 20 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 13 feet to allow for a 24' above 2round 0001. thus reouestine: a variance of 7 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 20 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 8 feet to allow for a 24' above e:round 0001. thus reauestine: a variance of 12 feet. \.... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 Minutes of May 8, 2007 '-' The property is located at 25 Bell Air Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-952783 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Mirsky: Our backyard slopes down to a level area which is where I would like to put the pool. To corne forward would make it more of an eyesore to my neighbor on Mina Drive. Where the ground is level I already have a 6 foot high fence. Mr. DellaCorte: Did you consider moving it closer? Mr. Mirsky: Bell Air is a hill and all the properties slope down so it would be very difficult. Mr. Fanuele: We will come out for a site visit on May 12th and we will set you public hearing for May 30th which is a Wednesday. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: But did you consider moving it closer? Mr. Mirsky: Yes but it would be a huge expense to bring a back hoe in there. You really need to corne out and see it. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Won't the fence be blocking the neighbor's views? Mr. Mirsky: No because the property slopes down. Thank you. ~ Appeal No. 06-7340 Brian & Irene Moodv - Seeking a Use Variance of Section 240-37 in the District Zoning Regulations for an R-40/80 Zoning District. Applicant is seeking a Use Variance for the continuance of a pre-existing non-conforming use as a two-family residence where only single family residences are permitted. The property is located 29 Middlebush Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-01- 394824 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: John Sarcone Mr. & Mrs. Moody: - Attorney - Owners Mr. Sarcone: We were here two weeks ago and at that time the board asked to adjourn to seek legal counsel and for further discussion. Mr. Fanuele: Your clients must satisfy the four points of a Use Variance. We will need certain documents and we will hire a CPA which will list which exact documents he will require. I have a sample here of some of the documents that may be required. (Read the list to the applicants. ) Tania I understand in reviewing this is that the dwelling size is smaller than zoning requires. Is that an issue? Mrs. Lukianoff: That is a requirement in the multi family zoning district. You would need to see if any of the bedrooms would not meet the building code requirements. ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Ms. McEvoy-Riley: ~ Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Sarcone: Mr. Caviglia: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: \- Mr. Caviglia: Mr. Scarcone: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. DellaCorte: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. Caviglia: Mr. Sarcone: \.. Page 5 Minutes of May 8, 2007 Mr. Chairman all four of these conditions have to be met in order for us to even consider this. Every single one of them. Yes. Not withstanding number 1 where you are requesting information for the accountant, my client have met every other condition and we would be happy to comply with the requests. At the last meeting you asked if there were any evidence that we could come up with in addition to what we had previously submitted as far as the pre-existing non-conforming use. My question was at that time was the Chairman willing to re- consider the application that was previously submitted stating that it should be granted approval based on the fact that this is pre-existing non- conforming mixed use? Between last time and now my clients were able to go out into the community and receive statements that this dates back to the 1960' s. Basically the parameters of the existing application are circumscribed by the statute that deals with Use Variances. I don't believe the Chairman meant to intimate that they would consider re-opening the Interpretation but you can submit whatever you like. The ZBA has indicated that it may want more information for the first factor. Tonight the board is going to vote on hiring a CPA. Can the applicant re-apply for a Interpretation. It was time-barred. I obviously disagree with counsel and I don't want to go to court over this but we are permitted to file for an Interpretation at any time. We did file and it was abandoned and we can re-file and I would be happy to support it with documents to support it and case law and opinions of the Attorney General if necessary. Its zoning 101. When the Moody's spoke of converting this to a one family from a two family there was a figure put forth somewhere around $60,000.00? Are we going to accept that figure or should we fact find whether it should be less? I believe once we get some documents and a CPA we may get an answer. Do we hire our own contractor and do we know what needs to be done. Yes if they want a use variance because all of those four conditions have to be true. The board is entitled to obtain an appraiser, CPA and or a contractor. We only brought this use variance as an attempt to compromise rather than go forward with a protracted litigation. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Ms. McEvoy-Riley: '--' Mr. Sarcone: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Sarcone: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Sarcone: Mr. Caviglia: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: \... Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Sarcone: Page 6 Minutes of May 8, 2007 But I am sure as an attorney you know that there are very few use variances granted anywhere. That's true. We realize that but we feel we meet that. They are willing to compromise and they are willing to give something up. There are four places in this document that you say "pre-existing legal non-conforming" . Yes in letters A to L and there are local residents here tonight to state the use as it was in the 1960's. You are saying that this was a two family home prior to zoning. I believe that it was. There were no records keep back then but I have these residents who state it was. Who will be the forensic CPA? The ZBA should take a vote to hire the CPA and Tom also raised the question of hiring a contractor too. I motion to authorize the Town Counsel to choose a CPA and contractor to review this property and the buildings on it. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. We will put you on the agenda for May 30th for further discussion. Thank you. 07-7343 DCB Wappineer Falls Tovota - Seeking area variances of Section 240-37 of District Zoning Regulations for HB Zoning. Where 10 feet is the maximum heieht allowed for a freestandine sil!D, the applicant is proposing a sign with the height of 14 feet, thus reQuestine a 4 foot variance from Section 240- 29(F)(2)(a) of the code of the Town of Wappinger. Where such sien shall not exceed two square feet for each linear foot of building length facing the street or 25 square feet, whichever is smaller, the applicant is proposine a sil!D of 112 SQ. fb thus reQuestine a variance of 87 SQ. ft. from Section 240-29(F)(2)(a) of the code of the Town of Wappinger. The property is located at 1349 Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-585606 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: Mr. Burns: \... Lee Burns - General Manager for DCH The parent company occasionally asks us to change the signs on the dealerships and this is a requirement of us. The sign we are proposing is 8 foot wide and 14 foot high. There are 10 designs available that Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ~ Mr. Prager: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Bums: Mr. Prager: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. Fanuele: Mrs. Lukianoff: Mr. Bums: Mr. DellaCorte: ~ Mr. Bums: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Meeting ended at 8:30 PM \... Page 7 Minutes of May 8, 2007 start at 14 feet high and go to 48 feet high. We have choosen the smallest size available and we need a variance to comply with Toyota's requirements. Why doesn't Toyota come in and change our town ordinance? I have a problem with signs that are wide from the top down to the ground and I prefer a pole for safety reasons. I don't believe that they have that option. I don't like the size of this. Maybe they should offer another option. What do you do if we deny it? They have a permit for the existing sign and they can just change the one they have. Then we will have to leave the one we have since we won't have a choice. What if I can get them to manufacture a smaller one? I would feel better. Ok I'll try that and I will get in touch with them tomorrow. Thank you. Motion to adjourn. Second the motion. All present voted aye. r ?