02-7129
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
/~
I,I/.r~~,,~", ,,~.~~!t~'^~',\
"0 ., v:'
lil- . ~\
',0\ .~.">%~'
c::.~'~
.J<' '
..'~' .~,
'~t'..,.~,.,>/.~~
~s~ co~jiil
~--~-"
SUPERVISOR
JOSEPH RUGGIERO
June 26, 2002
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
20 MIDDLEBUSH ROAD
WAPPINGERS FALLS, NY 12590-0324
(845) 297-1373
TOWN COUNCIL
VINCENT BETTINA
CHRISTOPHER J. COLSEY
JOSEPH P. PAOLONI
ROBERT L. VALDATI
To: Gloria Morse
Town Clerk
From: Michelle Gale, Secretary
T own of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Re: Mr. & Mrs. J. Waddell (former owner)
Mr. & Mrs. R. Leduc (new owner)
Appeal No. 02-7129
Application No. 20131
Attached you will find the original Application/Decision & Order
for Mr. & Mrs. Roger Leduc, 44 Pye Lane, Wappinger Falls, NY.
I would appreciate it if you would file these documents.
Attachments
cc: Mr. & Mrs. J. Waddell
Mr. & Mrs. R. Leduc
Zoning Board
Town File
T own Attorney
Building Inspector
Zoning Administrator
RECEIVED
JUL 0 1 2002
TOWN CLERK
,.' ".:. ~:t!... \.' ~
~ .
CXLdcU.-{ ~ . ) TjpvlL'u ~~i' ~/{)~
. . . c?-9t;g-~~S'P.AcfdL~' -
AREA V AlUANCE(S) APPLICATION
<. i .--
'. I
APPLICATION.TO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF \V APPINGER, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK .
Appeal # ~ '1/
Date: . . ~d-
Fee:
TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF W APPINGE.R, NEW YORK:
I (We) JaM~5Q.~J 0; ctV\.e. Wo..JJeJ I ,of
(Name of Appellant(s) (H) (S-Oi) S42..- n29
1~2..3 5pe.\ lAA-e.. SvJ) Kcx:.\'1eS+er NN ,(W)(5C,) '2..$3- 4'iL.f ,
(Mailing 'Address) ~O2... (Tel. Nos. HomelWork)
HEREBY APPEAL TO THE ZONING BO~ OF APPEALS FROM TjIE .
DECISION/ACTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, DATED ftpr..1 9
AND DO HEREBY APPLY FOR AN AREA V ARlANCE(S).
Premises located at LI LI P'te. Laf'\e... J Wapy~r\~ .~ll..s) N'I
(Address of Property)
~3~ -03 OS""S-OI9
(Grid Nos.) . (Zoning District) .
, ~ 2002.
l z.sq 0
1.. RECORD OWNER OF PROPERTY
~s-
. O\VNER CONSENT:
Signature: J
Printed:
2. V ARlANCE(S) REQUEST:
V ARlANCE NO.1
I (VIE) HEREBY APPLY TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A
V ARIANCE(S) OF THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE.
Sec----t1 on. . 2-LfO- 61
(Indicate Article, Section, Subsection and Paragraph)
REQUIRED: 2-S- ~ e...-T ~r s'\ de- o.rd
APPLICANT(S) CAN PROVIDE: 2.-3 ~T 3 \v\c...he
IY' If'
"- ~."
....
.! '.'
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ,
. . Area Variance Application :
Appeal No. 0;2 - 1/;27
Page 2
THUS REQUESTING: A-. \JO-f~ a.f"\ce ot z.' 'I~~-S
. TO ALLOW: E)( ~ STi V\g <:!eLk.. -to f'€-V\I\C\ ~ VOl 'V\ P lctce..
VARIANCE NO.2
I (WE) HEREBY APPLY TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A
V ARIANCE(S) OF THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONIN.G
ORDINANCE.
(Indicate Article, Section, Subsection and Paragraph)
. i
i
,
i
REQUIRED:
APPLICANT(S) CAN PROVIDE:
THUS REQUESTING:
TO ALLOW:
',1..
3. REASON FOR APPEAL (Please substantiate the request by answering thefol/owing
questions in detail. Use extra sheet, ifnecessary):. 'P\e.~ ..see. (A-\-\-o._ct~<t
A. IF YOUR V ARIANCE(S) IS (ARE) GRANTED, HOW WILL THE CHARACTER OF
. THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR NEARBY PROPERTIES CHANGE? WILL ANY OF
THOSE CHANGES BE NEGATIVE? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER IN
DETAIL.
B. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED THE V ARIANCE(S). IS THERE ANY WAY
TO REACH THE SAME RESULT WITHOUT A V ARIANCE(S)? PL:g:ASE BE
SPECIFIC IN YOUR ANSWER. .
-..
~..'
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Area Variance Application
Appeal No.
3. REASON FOR APPEAL
Project History:
In 1997, we (James and Diane Waddell) purchased the property located at 44 Pye Lane. The deck was already
in place. The exact time of its construction was and still is unknown, but to judge by the faded paint, it was not
new in 1997. The deck did not have the proper building permits, but this fact was not uncovered during any of
the research (inspection, title search, etc.) that we had commissioned before purchasing the house. Two years
later, in 1999, we added stairs to the deck, and improved the railing (the previous railing had open spaces
through which an infant easily could have fallen). In April 2002, we sold the house, and we are now trying to
complete the building permit process per the terms of the sale.
A. IF YOUR V ARIANCE(S) IS (ARE) GRANTED, HOW WILL THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD OR NEARBY PROPERTIES CHANGE? WILL ANY OF THOSE CHANGES
BE NEGATIVE? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER IN DETAIL.
The deck is similar in style and construction to other decks in the area, and the variance to the zoning rule is
very small. The character of the neighborhood and nearby properties will be completely unaffected.
B. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY YOU NEED THE V ARIANCE(S). IS THERE ANY WAY TO REACH
THE SAME RESULT WITHOUT A V ARIANCE(S)? PLEASE BE SPECIFIC IN YOUR ANSWER.
We need the variance because the deck was already in place before we purchased the house. We could not
achieve the same result without a variance unless we tore down the deck and built a new one. We would then
probably have to also move the sliding glass door a few inches as well. This would cause considerable
inconvenience for the new owners, and alter the interior of the house, with no tangible benefit. It would be
costly, and difficult to do without defacing the house itself. It should also be noted that the house itself is
slightly less than 25 feet from the property line.
C. HOW BIG IS THE CHANGE FROM THE STANDARDS SET OUT IN THE ZONING LAW? IS
THE REQUESTED AREA V ARIANCE(S) SUBSTANTIAL? IF NOT, PLEASE EXPLAIN IN
DETAIL WHY IT IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL.
At its closest point, the deck is 23.2'5 feet from the property line (see survey map). The zoning law calls for a
minimum of 25 feet. Thus the variance is 21" inches. This is not substantial.
D. IF YOUR V ARIANCE(S) IS (ARE) GRANTED, WILL THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT BE IMPACTED? PLEASE EXPLAIN, IN
DETAIL, WHY OR WHY NOT.
The deck is simple wood construction like many other decks in the neighborhood. It is already in place and has
been in place for years. Approving the variance will have no physical environmental impact.
E. HOW DID YOUR NEED FOR AN AREA V ARIANCE(S) COME ABOUT? IS YOUR
DIFFICULTY SELF-CREATED? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER IN DETAIL.
As stated above, both the house itself and the deck were built before we owned the property, and both were built
slightly less than 25 feet from the property line. The need for an area variance was not of our making.
-:-
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Area Vanance Application
Appeal No.
"
Page 3
C. HOW BIG IS THE CHANGE FROM THE STANDARDS SET OUT IN THE ZONING
LAW? IS THE REQUESTED AREA V ARIANCE(S) SUBSTANTIAL? IF NOT,
PLEASE EXPLAIN, IN DETAIL, WHY IT IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL.
D. IF YOUR V ARIANCE(S) IS (ARE) GRANTED, WILL THE PHYSICAL
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT BE
IMPACTED? PLEASEEXPLAlN,INDETAIL, WHY OR WHY NOT.
E. HOW DID YOUR NEED FOR AN AREA V ARIANCE(S) COME ABOUT? IS YOUR
DIFFICULTY SELF':CREATED? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWER IN DETAIL.
4. LIST OF ATT~CHMENTS (Check applicable information)
(~)SURVEYDATEP' A-pr;\ \~)\qq'l ,LASTREVISED ~r~\ Il..\}\qq'l AND
PREPAREDBY 'Ro..'IM(,)lI\cJ J. \Lih\W\i',e.
( ) PLOT PLAN DATED
( ) PHOTOS
( ) DRAWINGS DATED
( ) LETTER OF COMMUNICATION WHICH RESULTED IN APPLICATION TO
THEZBA. ,,'
(e.g., recommendationfrom the Planning Board / Zoning Denial)
LETTER FROM . DATED:
LETTER FROM DATED:
( ) OTHER (please list):
ji. .
. !
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Area Variance Application
Appeal No.
Page 4 :
I
I
"
5. SIGNATURE AND VERIFICATION
PLEASE.BE ADVISED THAT NO APPLICATION CAN BE DEEMED COMPLETE
UNLESS SIGNED BELOW.
THE APPLICANT HEREBY STATES THAT ALL INFORMATION GIVEN IS
ACCURATE AS OF THE DATE OF APPLICATION .
SIGNATURE ~~ ~~ATED:.
. . . (Appelld1ti)
. . .
SIGNATURE IJt~J~&ldd.v DATED:
(If more t n one Appellant)
~ j;~ /2-t)iJ 2-
, ,
S;//4j?OO2-
......... ... It....... II............ II... II....... 1"',... ....... II ....... II ......... II.... II........ ..... II.... ... I" .,
.............................................~....................................................................... i
. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
1. THE REQUESTED V ARIANCE(S) ( ) \VILL' / (~'WILL NOT PRODUCE AN .
UNDESIRABLE CHANGE IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
( ) YES / (N NO, SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT WILL BE CREATED TO NEARBY
. PROPERTIES.
2. THERE ( ) IS (ARE) / eX) IS (ARE) NO OTHER FEASIBLE METHODS
AVAILABLE FOR YOU TO PURSUE TO ACHIEVE THE BENEFIT YOU SEEK OTHER
THAN THE REQUESTED V ARIANCE(S). .
3. THE REQUESTED AREA V ARIANCE(S) ( ) IS (ARE) I '(,X) IS (ARE) NOT
. SUBST ANTrAL.
4. THE PROPOSED V ARIANCE(S) ( ) \VILL / ()() \VILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE
EFFECT OR IMP ACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR Ef<rVIRONMENT AL CONDITIONS IN
THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT.
5. THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY ( ) IS / Of.-) IS NOT SELF-CREATED.
jf",... '
tJa dddZ
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Area Variance Application
Appeal No. oJ -7/.;?9
Page 6
CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, IT WAS DETERMINED THE REQUESTED VARIANCE
BE (x) GRANTED ( ) DENIED.
CONDITIONS/STIPULATIONS: The following conditions and/or stipulations were adopted
by resolution of the Board as part of the action stated above:
The Zoning Board of Appeals voted to GRANT variance to allow existing deck
to remain 23.25 ft. from side yard setback.
(x ) FINDINGS & FACTS ATTACHED.
DATED:
June 26, 2002
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, NEW YORK
~/J ,
BYc$- ~7
(Chai an)
PRINT: Alan C. Lehigh