03-7161
~
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
PLANNING BOARD
May 14, 2003
To: Gloria Morse
Town Clerk
/t~ ~t~_Jt~~~1-~\1
1....11.'.7,..~. '0" -i. ...\1........ .... ,: ~ -.' ... \; .~.~.,..~,:
I',~,!.
,10 .!~
:~~ .~~.
"'0~~....
'~~~S C()
~~
PLANNING BOARD
20 MIDDLEBUSH ROAD
WAPPINGERS FALLS, NY 12590-0324
(845) 297-1373
FAX: (845) 297-4558
From: Barbara Roberti, Secretary
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals
Re: Hettinger/Fernwood Floral
Appeal No. 03-7161
Attached you will find the original Application/Decision & Order
for Hettinger/Fernwood FLoral, 51 Myers Comers Road, Wappinger Falls, NY.
I would appreciate it if you would file these documents.
Attachments
cc: Mrs. Hettinger
Mr. Trenkler
Zoning Board
Town File
Town Attorney
Building Inspector
Zoning Administrator
RECEIVED
MAY 1 4 2003
TOWN CLERK
SUPERVISOR
JOSEPH RUGGIERO
TOWN COUNCIL
VINCENT BETTINA
CHRISTOPHER J. COLSEY
JOSEPH P. PAOLONI
ROBERT L. VALDATI
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION ON INTERPRETATION APPLICATION
Applicants: H&B Office Products, Inc. and Femwood Floral Gardens
Premises: 51 Myers Comers Road
Tax Grid No.: 6157-02-899988
By Application dated March 7, 2003, H&B Office Products, Inc. (hereinafter referred
to as "HB") and Femwood Floral Gardens (hereinafter referred to as "Femwood") submitted
an Interpretation Application from a written determination made by Zoning Administrator,
Tatiana Lukianoff, dated March 7,2003.
Helen Hettinger, an officer ofHB, had previously requested a determination from the
Zoning Administrator, Tatiana Lukianoff, that the proposed use of the above premises for
sales and service of florist products was a continuation of the current use of the premises for
sales and service of office products.
Zoning Administrator Lukianoff, by letter dated March 7, 2003, in response to the
inquiry from Helen Hettinger, stated that "the proposed use is not one permitted in a
residential zone" and referred to the Town of Wappinger Zoning Code 9240-16(c)(3) which
states that a "non-conforming use of a building may be changed only to a conforming use".
0:\ WAPPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger-I nterpretation\Decision - Approval. DOC
PUBLIC HEARING
A. A Public Hearing on this Application was conducted on April 8, 2003, which
was adjourned to April 22, 2003 and closed on May 13,2003.
B. At the April 22, 2003 Public Hearing, Helen Hettinger of HB provided
testimony on behalf of the Applicants. In addition, she produced various documentation
pursuant to subpoena duces tecum requested by Richard Cantor on behalf of a neighboring
property. Chairman Alan Lehigh identified a list of the evidence presented which includes
the following:
1. March 7, 2003 - letter from Mr. Adams to Zoning Board of Appeals
2. March 10,2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
3. March 11,2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
4. March 14, 2003 - letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
5. March 17,2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
6. March 31,2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
7. April 3, 2003 - Zoning Administrator Interpretation Appeal
8. April 7, 2002 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
9. April 8, 2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
10. April 10, 2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
11. April 11, 2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
12. April 17, 2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Richard Cantor and Jon
Adams
13. April 22, 2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
14. Federal Income Tax Forms ofHB
15. Telephone Statements for HB
2
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
16. New York State Sales Tax Income Statement ofHB
17. Certificate of Occupancy and Variance for HB
18. Deed for RB Hettinger, Inc. dated July 17, 1975.
3
0:\ W APPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger -I nterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
FINDINGS
Based upon information and evidence provided at the Public Hearings, the Zoning
Board of Appeals makes the following findings:
1. The premises in question is located at 51 Myers Comers Road on a 0.26 acre
parcel in a R-20 residential zone.
2. The property has been used for at least 32 years for sales of office equipment
and supplies.
3. Applicant HB, through testimony provided by Helen Hettinger, has indicated
that HB has negotiated the sale of the existing premises presently occupied by "HB to
Femwood". Femwood seeks to operate its retail sales of florist products from this site.
4. By joint Application dated March 7, 2003, HB and Femwood requested to the
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals to interpret and decide whether the proposed
use ofthe building by Femwood for retail sales of florist products is a permitted use of the
premises or constitutes a change of use.
5. Testimony revealed that Helen Hettinger is an officer ofHB and has standing
to represent the corporate application ofHB.
6. On April 22, 2003, Helen Hettinger testified on behalf of the applicants that
she was present for a Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals meeting in 1971 at which
time a variance was issued for the subject premises "to change Normandy Farm [restaurant] to
a H&B Office [supplies]. It was changed and it was legal" according to Mrs. Hettinger.
7. A variance was granted on July 2, 1971 and a Certificate of Occupancy was
issued as a result thereof "for use as a legally non-conforming commercial building" with
respect to the premises at issue. The Building Permit further characterized the premises as a
"legally non-conforming commercial building".
4
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
8. This Interpretation Application is exempt from environmental review pursuant
to NYCRR ~617.5( c )(31) (SEQRA) as it is properly classified as a Type II action.
9. The Zoning Board of Appeals finds that testimony of Mr. Rocco Trenkle
provided on April 8, 2003 helpful in its determination ofthe following facts:
A. The premises appearance or structure will not change as of the use
proposed by the applicants;
B. There is no expected significant change with respect to the
occupants or clientele that would be conducting their business at the
premises;
C. The essential character of the prior use of a "legally non-conforming
commercial building", as it is characterized according to the
variance granted to the property on July 2, 1971, has not changed;
D. The essential character of the property as a commercial building will
not change by substituting floral products for office products;
E. A variance for a legally non-conforming commercial building was
issued on July 7, 1971 which runs with the land;
F. the proposed use is incident to the prior use of the premises as a
legally non-conforming commercial building engaging in retail sales
of consumer products.
5
0:\ W APPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger-lnterprelation\Decision - Approval. DOC
DECISION
10. The ZBA is of the opinion that the use ofthe premises for the sale and service
of office products is essentially the same as ifthe premises were used for the retail sale and
service offIorist products. The predominant use of the premises for the last 32 years while
occupied by HB was sales and service of office business equipment and supplies. Throughout
this period, the predominant use of the premises was for retail sales.
11. This Board notes that the Applicant HB had previously received a variance for
a "commercial building" and on October 29, 1971 subsequently received a C/O for "use as a
legally non-conforming commercial building".
12. The ZBA notes the Town's Zoning Code no longer simply refers to
"commercial" uses. The current Zoning Code categorizes uses as either "residential" or "non-
residential". Retail uses are permitted in HB, HM, MB, GB, CC, SC, HO, and HD Districts.
"Service" uses are permitted in the same Districts. Retail sales of office equipment or florist
products are not separately identified in the Zoning Ordinance - although "copy centers" are
referenced under the category of "service". The ZBA also notes there is no definition of the
term "retail" within the Zoning Code. The ZBA references the above permitted uses for non-
residential districts only as a guide for what may be permitted in non-residential districts.
13. The ZBA determines that since HB has obtained a variance for a "legally non-
conforming commercial building" and since the demonstrated principle use of the premises by
HB was that of retail sales and service business, it is our Decision that the use of the premises
for retail sales of florist products is a continuation of the non-conforming permitted use of the
building for retail sales.
6
0:\ WAPPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger-I nterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that it is the determination of the Town of
Wappinger ZBA that the change in use requested by the Applicants is in effect a continuation
of the use ofthe property for retail sales and is a permitted use under the Town of Wappinger
Zoning Code. Accordingly, Appeal No. 03-7161 is hereby approved and the decision ofthe
Zoning Administrator dated March 7, 2003 is hereby overruled.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing Decision was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows:
Alan Lehigh, Chairman
voting
&p
Gerald diPiemo, Member
voting
Douglas Warren, Member
voting
Howard Prager, Member
voting
Victor Fanuele, Member
voting
Dated: May 13, 2003
Wappingers Falls, New York
7
0:\ W APPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger-I nterprelation\Decision - Approval. DOC
-'
'-'
""wIllI
INTERPRETATION APPLICATION
APPLICATION TO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, DUTCHESS COUNTY, NEW YORK
Appeal #&- ~ I ~\
Date: :3' 7 -()3
Fee: ~5.DC)
Receipt~ t l ~ 3
TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TY.. WN OF WAPPINGER, NEW. YORK: ,
. -:F/1b'
I (We)-B ~ M~'\~1?,n~'\I(\< ~\D()O~ ~\~\!'~ \~~\l1~,of
. (Name of 4P'p'elIQllt(s~ ' C' \
5\ 'i\!\'\~,,~ Q~~~~s ~~. \~~~~r..\\)' . ~YS-' ;dqD~\J\.oh
(Mailing Address) (Tel. Nos. HomelWork)
HEREBY APPEAL TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION/ACTION OF
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, DATED , 19_AND DO HEREBY ArPLY FORAN
INTERPRETATION.
Premises located at 5\ 't\'\ ~\f'~ 0\J ~ ~~ ' '\K)~,,~ \ '\J\ l\ -e't') t:~~ s ~
. C4ddress of Property) \v
~ 1;;-'7-:-0 d--.- ~ '1 ~ ~ q;- &- '. ~- ~J-6
(Grid Nos.) , (Zoning District)
1. RECORD OWNER OF PROPERTY \\~\.. ~. t-\
-\, \J\!\~~' ~(\~. ~\/ \.AJ ~
\ (Address)
OWNER CONSENT: Dated: '3 ( t( ) Q '3 Signature:
~.. ~\l~~ \~~'\\\~\G-~
(Name)
d- 9 n --- '-, 0 \Db
(Phone Number)
Printed:
~~~.kl\V
. \1: ~ '-~ ~ \-\ ~"\\ G-E&:..
3. REASON FOR APPEAL (Please explain in detail. Use extra sheet, ifnecessary):
f\t),\-\~~ \;-. ~~ S~vvw? IJSe--SA'--~S
Aq~Q tY ~)~ \ V\ ~ l\.J.-..\I\J.... ...c;~' ~~.""'\J\A\ '^ ~ \--, \~
. I. . . -
~~ ~~~12 -\)~",,\~c1- ~H2_ ~~ ~,~~\\~,,~\ SOV--
~O\j K '\ \\~\\~~'\-~'-\-\ ~,
~.
".
'-'
...",
Zoning Board of ApiJeals
Interpretation Application .
Appeal No.
Page 2
REASON FOR APPEAL CONTINUED
4'. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS (Check applicable information)
( ~ SURVEY DXfED , LAST REVISED
BY
AND PREP Al,l,ED
( ) PHOTOS
( ) DRAWINGS DATED
(1/) LETTER OF COMMUNICATION WHICH RESULTED IN APPLICATION TO THE ZBA.
(e.g., recommendation from the Planning Board / Zoning Denial) \ L .
LETTER FROM 'TA \\ ~ t-\ ~ 'l--u'" \ ~ \'\oFF- DATED: '3 _ b l) l!L'7
LETTER FROM DATED:
. ( ) OTHER (please list):
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
~~~~ DATED:
/.--: ,(Appellant) \\
:'-)} ~rq~ DATED:
. (If more than one Appellant)
C'bf\~'"\:' \Jffi~
j
~
SIGNATURE
'~ \ 'i ~ \f~ ~
l
0:
"
) Zoning Board of Appeals
Interpretation Application
Appeal No. 03-7161
Page 3
. II II.... II II...... II..... II 1,.,1 II.......... II.. II... I" ... ... II' ... ... ... ... 11.,1.. II...... II........ II.. II..... .....................
... .. ~. .. .. .... .. .......... I......... ......... ................................... . ............... ..... ........ ... . .... .. ......... . . ,~.. .
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
CONCLUSION: THEREFORE, IT WAS DETERMINED THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
, ( ) UPHELD (Xx) REVERSED THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S PREVIOUS
DECISION.
CONDITIONS/STIPULATIONS: The following conditions and/or stipulations were adopted by resolution of
the Board as part of the action stated above:
(XX) FINDINGS & FACTS ATTACHED.
. DATED: May 14, 2003
"
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, NEW YORK
..~ L~'
BY.. ~ > /~Z~'
, ,(Chai~ "
PRINT: Alan C. Lehigh ' .
'.
.'
J'.u'I""4 {'Ji.l.JI-IU.. .....
~I
. ..
~LqR
.)
/ .P~~JE~~ 1.~.NUMDE.r.
'. . ..' "
617.20
Appendix C -....",I. .:\
Slala Environmontal Quality Rovlow' ~..
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT-FORM
For .UNLiSTED ACTIONS Only
PART I-PROJECT INFORMATION (To be compleled by Applicant or Project sponsor) .
: I. ...ppuc,\NT I ONSOR 2. PR~T NJ,ME
'-;::' ~ --1::.. V\. 4:
MunlcJp~lIIy '{' Counly . V () ~
4. PRE.CISE LO~T10N lSlreol ~aC:ros~ ~nd ro.d Inle(3ocllons, llromlna(\ll~nc:in~rks. ale:.. or llroylda.m~pl ., .... ,;:.
S- \ \,N\ "\ ~\f'~ ~<l ~ .~~ .
~~..~'t\\l,\ t\J'~ ~ \l~'~ '-\
1_.
,., .1.._.
I'
.,. ."'1' .,
.
"
I
: \
I
.
,'.;
, "...... ",1;'
','; '0.'.
" .'.
'. l . \',:, ~.:!! '.' '", _, '.: .l',~ .
.5. IS PROpOSEO ACTION:
aw 0 E.sp~nslon
~: OESCFJ6E PROJECT 6RIEf\.Y:
o Modlllc'Itlon/.ltcr'lllon
To ~~~~~ k-u .~ \~.~~\
~" ~.' ~\:-~~,,\. .~.\~ "'\~..
Q ~~~. \\\~
......,;".,~:..."'.......' :.;., \,. .
8. 'c.'.": ....13. .... '.'
'. ,I," '. '. :. ..
" '~._" . .
,. . .,
. . - . . .
..;,... .
1. AMOUNT OF LAND AFf~CTEO:
1,,/II.lly . Qt.o A~ ~~cras Ultlm'lloly ~e:ras
4. WILL PROPOSED ACilON COMPLY WITH EXiSTING ZONING OR OTHer. E<JSTING LAND US~RESTnlCiIONS?
OYu ONO II No, do.:;crlba brlclly ,
.'.''',;.'
j
S.WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT?
~RC3ldanll~1 Olnduslrlal 0 Commercl'II o Agrlc:sUura
O.sulba: \}J~ 'i?~ ~~_~
. ~; " ~ ~
.0 P.rWForesUDpan Jll~Cll .'
o Olher
. : ~ '
.~O.\A.~ ,,".
c'. ...., , I .... " ~"..... ~'; ", 'I: . '. "..01 I :
10. OOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL OR FUNOING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNME1'lT,\L AG~'1CY tFj;OE.=iAL
I STATE OR LOCAU7 . '-
o Yu ~o II yc~, lbl ~l1ancY{31 ~nd pcrmJU~llpronlJ
.. ...
,
". .._.__..rl.,.._.a__ "--"_", ......
.. . . \.....
. ~..." \ ..... .
..~. ~;. .-:,.... . .
. '. ......
, .', ';. .1 r .~ ~:~-.{\:.Jt',U ~;',~; 1 ~ ',::~ (a" )'".;,".' rJ.~.'. ~~ l r'i~ j
.' '.. '.' ........ ,l~..:-,'~..: '.',:" '~,~'.\!l.,i;.~"'''''f''; .,~...: ....'
.1 ~'.'. (,
II'
..
J.....
11. DOES ANY ~ECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAUD PERMIT OR APPROVAL7"':!'!"'~" .:'..~":~,:~::~<:".", :. iJ
. 0 Yes ~o. II yes. IIs1 ~Qancl' OO1ma ~nd parmIV~Pllrov~1 .... " '
. .
",tI':., .... _:".
......
;". '.
" \. '!' ,'"
. I "
'.\. ;..... . t
;.
12. AS). REsULT OF paoPOSj;O ACTION WILL E.XISTlNG PE:lMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? .
DYe, DNo' . .... .
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIOEO AllOVe IS TRUE TO 'THE aEST OF MY KNOWLEO'GE
, '-." ....' ..... .~~._~. .-
.
,:::::::~'M";~~~~~~~
,
,
'I' .
;';~:r O~l.e; ." ~ r ~. ! {\3 .
..
I
. .
IC the action is in the Coastal Arca, and you arc a stale agency. 'complc!'c Ih~
Coastal Assessment For";1 before proceeding ~ith this assessment
.
r
I; OVE~
...
--op,,-,,-
.
, ,
'-' ''''''';
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
TATIANA LUKIANOFF
~~<~~ W~~IJ!~'
!,~'~~." '.,'~ ~~"-"~,~~~,""'",,,,
718" ~'~
1(1- I _~21>:
\\O~,i~
\\C,,4,
,\ ,,'\,,:
\~~> ,: /t:'
~t~s C()~/~
SUPERVISOR
JOSEPH RUGGIERO
March 7, 2003
ZONING DEPARTMENT
20 MIDDLEBUSH ROAD
WAPPINGERS FALLS, NY 12590-0324
(845) 297-6257
FAX: (845) 297-4558
TOWN COUNCIL
VINCENT BETTINA
CHRISTOPHER J. COLSEY
JOSEPH P. PAOLONI
ROBERT L. VALDATI
Mrs. Helen Hettinger
51 Myers Comers Road
Wappingers Falls, New York 12590
RE: Hettineer /Fernwood Floral
51 Myers Comers Road
Tax Grid #6157-02-899988
Dear Mrs. Hettinger,
As per our conversation of today, you stated you have this day withdrawn your Use
Variance application (appeal # 02-7147 ) feeling that the present day business use is the
same as the proposed use as a florist. If true then only a Change of Occupant Permit
would be required rather than a Use Variance.
In my letter of October 24, 2000, to Mr. Jon Holden Adams, attorney, who was
representing you for an earlier appeal (#00-7071) I referenced Section 240-16( c) 3 a non-
conforming use of a building may be changed only to a conforming use. The proposed
use is not one permitted in a residential zone.
You have the right to appeal this determination by applying to the Zoning Board of
Appeals for their interpretation.
Very t, ruly Your~s, , ~~
~tL ~'
Tatiana Lukiano
Zoning Administrator
cc: Hon. Joseph Ruggiero, Town Supervisor
Zoning Board of Appeals
Mr. Albert P. Roberts, Attorney to the Town
Mr. Dan Wery, Planner
file
---
f' .~.
~
"""
~A TO ~.
5(:.ARIFIED,
:JfiOIL APDf:;p
$el!PEJ? ANt'
MU..t...HE.D __'0,
PROPo-SE[) SITE PL,AN
t ~
~ranLD~) ~\ef6t I HdIi~&r
I I
I .
I
,f
I
I
. .-..... t. "'T""
.
RESOLUTION
At a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wappinger,
Dutchess County, New York, held at Town Hall, 20 Middlebush Road, Wappingers Falls, New
York, on the lih day of August, 2003, at 7:30 P.M.
The meeting was called to order by Alan Lehigh, Chairman, and upon roll being called,
the following were present:
PRESENT: Chairman
l~'sI~
Members
Wg"':dIr.d Pr~ger
Gerald diPiemo
Douglas Warren
Victor Fanuele
ABSENT:
The following Resolution was introduced by 'Ju .tLtAt~
~ .MtM~~
and seconded by
WHEREAS, by Application dated March 7, 2003, H&B Office Products, Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as "HB") and Femwood Floral Gardens (hereinafter referred to as
"FERN\VOOD") made an application for an interpretation from a written determination made by
the Zoning Administrator dated March 7, 2003; and
WHEREAS, by Decision dated May 13, 2003, the Zoning Board of Appeals made a
determination that the premises occupied by HB of 51 Myers Comers Road, Wappingers Falls,
New York could be used by FERNWOOD for the retail sales at florist products as a continuation
of the non-conforming permitted use of the building for retail sales; and
0:\ W APPI NGE\ZBA \Hettinger-I nterpretation\Resolution .doc
WHEREAS, by Notice of Petition and Petition dated May 30, 2003, Salvatore Pace and
Regina Pace made Application to the Supreme Court, State of New York, County of Dutchess,
seeking a judgment nullifying and invalidating the aforementioned Decision; and
WHEREAS, it has been reported that FERNWOOD has indicated it no longer intends to
occupy 51 Myers Corners Road to use same for retail sale of florist products; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that HB has contracted to sell the subject property to
be developed and used for single family residential purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows:
1. The recitations above set forth are incorporated in this Resolution as if fully set
forth and adopted herein.
2. The Zoning Board of Appeals hereby rescinds, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, its
~<""'e~
Decision on Interpretation Application dated May 13,2003 in connection with the property
owned by HB and located at 51 Myers Comers Road, Wappingers Falls, New York, a copy of
said Decision is attached hereto marked and designated Exhibit "A".
3. The Zoning Board of Appeals hereby authorizes and directs Attorney to the
Town, Albert P. Roberts, to take whatever steps are necessary to discontinue the Article 78
Proceeding commenced by Salvatore Pace and Regina Pace by Notice of Petition and Petition
dated May 30, 2003, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, to the rights of either the Petitioners or the
Respondents.
4. The Zoning Board of Appeals further determines that this action in rescinding its
Decision, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, is a Type IT action under State Environmental Quality
Review Act (SEQRA) and accordingly, requires no environmental review as a precondition to
making its determination hereunder.
0:1 W APPI NGE\Z8A IHettinger-lnterpretationIResolution.doc
I
t
The foregoing was put to a vote which resulted as follows:
ALAN LEHIGH, Chairman Voting ~,;j
HOWARD PRAGER, Member Voting ~,
GERALD diPIERNO, Member Voting 1;'
DOUGLAS WARREN, Member Voting
. --- fJ4-e .
VICTOR F ANUELE, Member Voting
Dated: Wappingers Falls, New York
August 12,2003
lAc c. (' tt"~ /KA'U '
0:1 W APP I NGE\ZBA IHettinger-lnterpretationIResolution.doc
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION ON INTERPRETATION APPLICATION
Applicants: H&B Office Products, Inc. and Fernwood Floral Gardens
Premises: 51 Myers Corners Road
Tax Grid No.: 6157-02-899988
By Application dated March 7, 2003, H&B Office Products, Inc. (hereinafter referred
- ---
to as "HE") and Femwood Floral Gardens (hereinafter referred to as "Fernwood") submitted
an Interpretation Application from a written determination made by Zoning Administrator,
Tatiana Lukianoff, dated March 7, 2003.
Helen Hettinger, an officer ofHB, had previously requested a determination from the
Zoning A-dministrator, Tatiana Lukianoff, that the proposed use of the above premises for
sales and service of florist products was a continuation of the current use of the premises for
sales and service of office products.
Zoning Administrator Lukianoff, by letter dated March 7; 2003, in response to the
inquiry from Helen Hettinger, stated that "the proposed use is not one permitted in a
residential zone" and referred to the Town of Wappinger Zoning Code 9240-16(c)(3) which
states that a "non-conforming use of a building may be changed only to a conforming use".
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision . Approval.DOC
<..
PUBLIC HEARING
A. A Public Hearing on this Application was conducted on April 8, 2003, which
was adjourned to April 22, 2003 and closed on May 13,2003.
B. At the April 22, 2003 Public Hearing, Helen Hettinger ofHB provided
testimony on behalf of the Applicants. In addition, she produced various documentation
pursuant to subpoena duces tecum requested by Richard Cantor on behalf of a neighboring
property.. Chairman Alan LehIgh identified a list of the evidence presented which includes
the following:
1. March 7, 2003 -letter from Mr. Adams to Zoning Board of Appeals
2. March 10,2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
3. March 11,2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
4. March 14,2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
5. March 17,2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
6. March 31,2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
7. April 3, 2003 - Zoning Administrator Interpretation Appeal
8. April 7, 2002 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
9. April 8,2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
10. April 10, 2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Zoning Board of Appeals
11. April 11, 2003 - letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
12. April 17, 2003 -letter from Mr. Roberts' office to Richard Cantor and Jon
Adams
13. April 22, 2003 -letter from Mr. Cantor's office to Zoning Board of Appeals
14. Federal Income Tax Forms ofHB
15. Telephone Statements for HB
2
O;\WAPPINGE1.ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision . Approval.DOC
'-
16. New York State Sales Tax Income Statement ofHB
17. Certificate of Occupancy and Variance for HB
18. DeedforRB Hettinger, Inc. dated July 17,1975.
3
O:\WAPPINGE\Z8A\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
',...""
FINDINGS
Based upon information and evidence provided at the Public Hearings, the Zoning
Board of Appeals makes the following findings:
1. The premises in question is located at 51 Myers Comers Road on a 0.26 acre
parcel in a R-20 residential zone.
2.
The property has been used for at least 32 yearS for sales of office equipment
and supplies.
3.
Applicant HB, through testimony provided by Helen Hettinger, has indicated
that HB has negotiated the sale of the existing premises presently occupied by "HB to
Femwood". Femwood seeks to operate its retail sales of florist products from this site.
4. By joint Application dated March 7, 2003, HB and Femwood requested to the
Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals to interpret and decide whether the proposed
use of the building by F emwood for retail sales of florist products is a permitted use of the
premises or constitutes a change of use.
5. Testimony revealed that Helen Hettinger is an officer ofHB and has standing
to represent the corporate application ofHB.
6. On April 22, 2003, Helen Hettinger testified on behalf of the applicants that
she was present for a Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals meeting in 1971 at which
time a variance was issued for the subject premises "to change Normandy Farm [restaurant] to
a H&B Office [supplies]. It was changed and it was legal" according to Mrs. Hettinger.
7. A variance was granted on July 2, 1971 and a Certificate of Occupancy was
issued as a result thereof "for use as a legally non-conforming commercial building" with
respect to the premises at issue. The Building Permit further characterized the premises as a
"legally non-conforming commercial building".
4
0:\WAPPINGE\Z8A\Hettinger-lnterpretalionIDecision - Approval.DOC
8. This Interpretation Application is exempt from environmental review pursuant
to NYCRR 9617.5( c )(31) (SEQRA) as it is properly classified as a Type II action.
9. The Zoning Board of Appeals finds that testimony of Mr. Rocco Trenkle
provided on April 8, 2003 helpful in its determination of the following facts:
A. The premises appearance or structure will not change as of the use
proposed by the applicants;
B. There-ts-no expected significant change with respect to the
occupants or clientele that would be conducting their business at the
prenuses;
c. The essential character of the prior use of a "legally non-conforming
commercial building", as it is characterized according to the
variance granted to the property on July 2, 1971, has not changed;
D. The essential character of the property as a commercial building will
not change by substituting floral products for office products;
E. A variance for a legally non-conforming commercial building was
issued on July 7, 1971 which runs with the land;
F. the proposed use is incident to the prior use of the premises as a
legally non-conforming commercial building engaging in retail sales
of consumer products.
5
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
DECISION
10. The ZBA is of the opinion that the use of the premises for the sale and service
of office products is essentially the same as if the premises were used for the retail sale and
service of florist products. The predominant use of the premises for the last 32 years while
occupied by HE was sales and service of office business equipment and supplies. Throughout
this period, the predominant use of the premises was for retail sales.
11. This Board notes-=tliat-lhe Applicant HE had previously received a variance for
a "commercial building" and on October 29, 1971 subsequently received a C/O for "use as a
legally non-conforming commercial building".
12. The ZBA notes the Town's Zoning Code no longer simply refers to
"commercial" uses. The current Zoning Code categorizes uses as either "residential" or "non-
residential". Retail uses are permitted in HE, HM, ME, GB, CC, SC, HO, and HD Districts.
"Service" uses are permitted in the same Districts. Retail sales of office equipment or florist
products are not separately identified in the Zoning Ordinance - although "copy centers" are
referenced under the category of "service". The ZBA also notes there is no definition of the
term "retail" within the Zoning Code. The ZBA references the above permitted uses for non-
residential districts only as a guide for what may be permitted in non-residential districts.
13. The ZBA determines that since HE has obtained a variance for a "legally non-
conforming commercial building" and since the demonstrated principle use of the premises by
HB was that of retail sales and service business, it is our Decision that the use of the premises
for retail sales of florist products is a continuation of the non-conforming permitted use of the
building for retail sales.
6
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision . Approvat.DOC
,
. .
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that it is the determination of the Town of
Wappinger ZBA that the change in use requested by the Applicants is in effect a continuation
of the use of the property for retail sales and is a permitted use under the Town of Wappinger
Zoning Code. Accordingly, Appeal No. 03-7161 is hereby approved and the decision of the
Zoning Administrator dated March 7,2003 is hereby overruled.
The question of the adoption of the foregoing Decision-was duly put to a vote on roll
call, which resulted as follows:--===--
Alan Lehigh, Chairman voting
Gerald diPiemo, Member voting
Douglas Warren, Member voting
Howard Prager, Member voting
Victor Fanuele, Member voting
Dated: May 13,2003
Wappingers Falls, New York
Alan Lehigh, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Wappinger
7
O:\WAPPINGE\ZBA\Hettinger-lnterpretation\Decision - Approval.DOC
STATE OF NEW YORK,.
COUNTY OF DUTCHESS,
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
! is.:
I, GLORIA 1. MORSE, Town Clerk of the Town of Wappinger, N.Y., do hereby certify that I have compared the
foregoing copy of a Resolution adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 12, 2003,
rescinding, without prejudice, their decision on the Hettinger/Fernwood Interpretation,
with the original record thereof now remaining on file or of record in this office
and have found the same to be a correct transcript therefrom and the whole of
such original record.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my
Jeal of office, this -/-2___ day of fl!:!~___________, 20Q3
-----:--~------:7------:--~---m---1 Town Clerk
By --1________ c.,.. -~-:--, Deputy Clerk