99-7031 (2)
.'
. ;
"
Applicant:
'9~
DECISION ON APPlICA liON FOR AREA VARIANCES ~ O~J ~
(Appeal No. 99-7031) ~ _~)- ~
~ ""l~ ".5" ~. .
Martin's Foods of South Burlington, Inc. o~~{('O'~ ~ <:>
C( o~ ~
Wappinger Plaza Shopping Center, U.S. Route 9, approximateIY~~
feet north of Myers Corners Road
Tax Grid Nos.: 19-6157-02-653974
Premises:
By Application dated February 28,2000 (Appeal No. 99-7031), Martin's Foods
of South Burlington Inc. submitted an Area Variance Application for two variances
from the Dimensional Regulations of the Town of Wappinger Code. Applicant
requested-two variances specifically:
A. A 20' variance from the 50' minimum rear yard requirement of Section
240-12 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Code (Schedule of Dimensional
Regulations for Non-Residential Districts); and
B. 1.3% variance from the 20% maximum building coverage of Section
240-12 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Code (Schedule of Dimensional
Regulations for Non-Residential Districts),
PUBLIC HEARING
A. A Public Hearing on this Application was opened on March 28, 2000,
which was adjourned to April 11 , 2000, April 25, 2000 and again adjourned to and
closed on May 9,2000. At the Public Hearing, the following documents were
submitted into evidence:
1. Site plan entitled "Overall Amended Site Plan for Wappinger Plaza"
dated October 21, 1999, last revised February 29, 2000 (the "Site Plan"),
2, A parking study dated January 18, 2000 prepared by Tectonic
Engineering Consultants, P.C. ("Tectonic"), as supplemented by additional parking
information prepared by Tectonic dated April 25, 2000.
3. Environmental Assessment Form and "supporting documentation"
dated January 18, 2000.
4. Traffic Impact Study dated January 31,2000 prepared by Creighton
Manning Engineering.
5. Letter from Tectonic dated May 4,2000 to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
6. A copy of a resolution of the Planning Board adopted April 17 , 2000
entitled "Resolution of Negative Declaration of Significance" (the "Negative
Declaration").
7.-' A copy of a resolution of the Planning Board adopted April 17, 2000
entitled "Resolution of Site Plan Approval" (the "Site Plan Approval").
8. Letter from Jon Holden Adams, Esq. dated April 25, 2000 written on
behalf of Imperial Improvements.
9. A Letter dated May 8,2000 from Town of Wappinger Planning Board to
the Zoning Board of Appeals recommending that the requested variances be
granted.
10.
6, 1999.
11.
12.
2/10/00.
12.
Letter from Dutchess County Department of Planning dated December
Letter from applicant to the Zoning Board of Appeals dated 12/6/99.
Letter from Attorney Albert P. Roberts to Imperial Improvements dated
Letter from Wharton Realty Corp. dated 8/12/99.
2
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
, ,
B. THE TESTIMONY SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT
NOTED:
1. Only a small portion of the proposed expansion (approximately 1,200
square foot polygon) cannot comply with the 50' setback for the rear yard.
2. The proposed expansion includes a floor plan utilizing wider aisles,
more open space and more storage and food preparation areas than previously
existed and as such does not represent a directly proportional increase in the
intensity of use.
C.-- At the May 1, 2000 meeting, the Planning Board determined that the
rear yard setback and building coverage variances are minor in nature and will
not have any significant impact on the character of the shopping center or the
surrounding area; the Planning Board recommended in favor of granting the
requested variances.
D. Based on the information supplied and submitted at the Public
Hearings, the Zoning Board of Appeals makes the following findings:
FINDINGS
1. The Planning Board acted as "Lead Agency" for the purpose of
conducting the coordinated environmental review of the project as required by the
State Environmental Quality Review Act and the Regulations promulgated thereunder
and the Wappinger Environmental Quality Review Law (collectively "SEQRA").'
2. By Resolution dated April 17, 2000, the Planning Board of the Town of
Wappinger, as Lead Agency, adopted a Negative Declaration of Significance,
3
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
thereby determining that the proposed action would not result in a significant adverse
effect upon the environment.
3. The Project involves expansion of the Wappinger Plaza Shopping
Center from a total of 105,974 square feet to 120,535 square feet including the
replacement of the existing drug store and 40,000 square foot supermarket retail
space with a larger supermarket building, new parking and circulation layout, new
lighting, landscaping and drainage, fire system and sanitary sewer disposal
improvements, all as shown on the Site Plan.
4. -. The Project is located on U.S. Route 9 in a highly developed retail and
commercial area of the Town and is located in the Shopping Center (SC) District
under the Town's Zoning Code.
5. The Project seeks to demolish a portion of the existing facility
previously occupied by Waldbaum's Supermarket and Rite Aid Drug Store with a new
Hannaford Supermarket containing 55,400 square feet; the Waldbaum's building and
Rite Aid building have been vacant for approximately four (4) years.
6. The 20' variance for the rear yard setback affects a small portion of the
building (approximately 1,200 square feet). The remainder of the building would
conform with the rear yard setback requirement of Section 240-12 of the Town of
Wappinger Code.
7. The proposed expansion includes a floor plan utilizing wider aisles,
more open space and more storage and food preparation areas than previously
existed, and as such does not represent a directly proportional increase in the
intensity of use.
4
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
8. In rendering its decision herein, the Zoning Board of Appeals
considered the following factors and made the following determinations:
1 a: Will the requested variance be detrimental to nearby properties?
Answer: No - The neighborhood is predominantly retail and commercial and the
Project consists of reconstruction of an existing vacant retail facility. There is no
evidence to suggest that the increase in building coverage would be detrimental to
nearby properties. In addition, the portion of the rear yard of the Project site affected
by the variance request borders on the unused "stem" of the contiguous property; the
unused "stem" is approximately 100' wide and essentially undevelopable. The
nearest building, occupied by Dutchess Community College, is located over 100'
from the affected area and is screened from the portion of the building which would
be built in the setback area by a dense wood buffer. Overall there would, in fact, be
a positive impact on the nearby properties since a long vacant facility will be replaced
with an active supermarket.
1 b. Will an undesirable change occur in the character of the
neig hborhood?
Answer: No. - Nearby properties are predominantly retail and/or commercial.
The slight increase in the permitted building size as well as the reduction of the
setback for a portion of the rear yard will not change the character of the
neighborhood. In fact, the increased landscaping and the overall rejuvenation of the
Wappinger Plaza Shopping Center will have a beneficial affect on the neighborhood.
2. Are there any alternative (feasible) methods to achieve the
benefit sought by Applicant?
5
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
Answer: No - The proposed building configuration and site layout have been
designed to optimize existing site layout with respect to parking and building location,
while maintaining the building area necessary for the applicant to provide the
products and services needed to service the community and to avoid the occurrence
of another vacancy.
3. Is the requested variance substantial?
Answer: No. - The rear yard setback variance will only affect a small portion of
the building (approximately 1,200 square feet). Similarly, the maximum building
coverage variance will only result in an increase of 1.3%.
4. Will the variance cause adverse effects on the physical and/or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district?
Answer: No - The Planning Board has issued a Negative Declaration of
Significance with respect to the Project. Moreover, the Project will replace a long
vacant site and rejuvenate the Wappinger Plaza Shopping Center.
5. Is the difficulty "self created"?
Answer: No.
DECISION
1. In reaching this decision hereinafter the Zoning Board of Appeals takes
into consideration the following:
A. Neighboring properties are retail and/or commercial.
B. The Project will replace a long vacant commercial facility located
in an existing shopping center.
6
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
C. The Planning Board determined that the rear yard setback and
building coverage variances are minor in nature and will not have
any significant impact on the character of the shopping center or
the surrounding area; the Planning Board recommended in favor
of granting the requested variances; the Planning Board has
issued a Negative Declaration of Significance with respect to the
Project.
D. The requested variance will not be detrimental to the neighboring
properties which are retail/commercial and will not have an
undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood.
E. The Project will have an overall positive impact on the character
of the neighborhood; the Project will rejuvenate the Wappinger
Plaza Shopping Center and will result in a new, active
supermarket and increased landscaping
F. The requested variances are not substantial.
G. The difficulty is not self created.
2. By reason of the foregoing, the application for two variances from the
requirements of the Schedule of Dimensional Regulations contained in Section 240-
12 of the Town of Wappinger Code is granted.
7
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000
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 "aye"
Gerald diPierno, Member voting "aye"
Douglas Warren, Member voting "aye"
Howard Prager, Member voting "aye"
Victor Fanuele, Member Absent
Dated: May 9, 2000
Wappingers Falls, New York
,0
C.
Alan Lehigh, Chairman of Zonin
Appeals, Town of Wappinger
8
\\VERGILlS2\SYS\COMMON\WAPPINGE\HANNAFOR\DEC2.DOC I May 11, 2000