986
~
, <
TO\VN OF ,'I\PPINGER
NOTICE OF APPEAL
~~
MAR 1 1 1987
EUIIE II. __
Home r.. tailing
Ad~~s RD 1~ Box 133~
ApPefNo. q~lo
Date-Te.b-. 11~ \ q~'1
.C(~
Ap~ll~t Thomas J. Morley Jr.
Smithtown Rd., Fishkill~ N.Y.
Zip Code: 12524
Tel.JI:914 896-5857
.
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS:
Thoma s J. Hor ley Jr. . :lppeal from a decision of the Zonin'g Inspector, dated
Sent. 8 , 19~, and do hereby apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for: fiEl A VARIANCE, 0 A
SPECIAL USE PERIvtI1: 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 AN APPEAL AS AN
AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) (check proper one), in connection with premises located at Schlicter Rd. (pri va te) "
off Smi thtown Rd. (sam. & no.)
R-8o 6156-02-9~0942 . TownofWapping~r,N.'Y.
(zorung diSl.) (&nd nO.l ,
A \ V) <$ lH 1 . ~8..ccd t lt~
1 PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED to allow f'or subd-i-vision of a lot
. into 2 lots of approximate equal size, the new lot having legal road front-
age on Smi thtown Rd. the remaining lot with premi,se having frontage on '.-' '
(anl~c. section or sub~uon and parayaphl S chi i c t erR d
resulting in one such lot being less than the the required ~O,OOO-s/f-J:ot- a~ea' requ1:rement.
2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Complete relevant section). ..
I,
a. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED for the following reasons: , , , '~' " ___ " . (con't);
1) Strict applic:ltion of the Zoning Ordin:1nce would produce undue hardship because: Appellant is being · I
denied the reasonable use of and full market value of his property which I
2) The hardship created is unique and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property !
I
, and in this district bec:lUse:as specified in a.' sub 1 above,appellant1s property is ~
1 of 2 parcels out of 15 total with a subdivision hardsh~p 'created by the'l'
3) The variance woul~ observe the spirit of the Ordin~ce and would not change the character of the district ' ,T own.. It
~me: the proposed use is a permitted use and the surrounding~parcels I
are both cpnforming, and non-conforming in the, imni'ediate" area.
b. A SPECL~ USE PERMIT IS REQUESTED pursUDllt to article . seaion or subsection
. paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the following use on the
-
above premises:
c. INTERPRETATION of the Zonrn~ Ordinance is requested because:
d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested became:
.
3. OTHER REMARKS: reque st is for re-hearing
due to 'new information from case history
direct bearing on appellant's case.
---. -
of appeal # 937, dated 10/24/86
not' 'previously submitted with
(Use extra sheets if necessary)
Signature
&~&h~~.
· The required plan must accompany the Notice of Appeal.
APPELLANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS INVO'LvE"6 IN PUBLISHING THE REQUIRED LEGAL
NOTICE IN THE' LOCAL NEWSPAPER.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TO\VN OF WAPPINGER
ACflON ON APPEAL
Appeal No.
986
Dated March 11th, 1987
Appellant Thomas J. Morley Jr.
Smithtown Road, Fishkill, NY 12524
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on March 10th ,19 87 ,Appeal No. 986
was considered and the following action on the request for: IK] A VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE PERMI'f, 0 AN
INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 AN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S), was
taken:
1. VARIANCE: By resolution of the Board, it was determined that strict application of the Ordinance 0 would 0 would
not produce undue hardship for these reasons:
a. The property in question 0 would 0 would not yield a reasonable return if limited to the use permitted under the
Ordinance, because:
Address
RD 1 Box 133
b. The hardship created 0 is 0 is not unique and 0 would 0 would not be shared by all properties alike in the
vicinity of the property and in the same use district, because:
c. The variance 0 would 0 would not change the character of the district, because:
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance 0 ~ted ~ be denied and that the prevfous
decision of the Enforcement Officer !XI be confirmed D-*"felr'.eFSed. SEE ATTACHMENT.
2. SPECIAL USE PERMIT: By resolution of the Board it was determined that the request for a Special Use Permit 0 be
granted 0 be denied, pursuant to article , section or subsection , paragraph of the
Zoning Ordinance and, therefore, the decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 be reversed 0 be confirmed, because:
3. INTERPRETATION: The Board adopted the following resolution which stated its interpretation of the Zoning
Ordinance as requested in your appeal:
4. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S): By resolution of the Board, the following decision was made on your appeal:
~ .
r- ~~-~,,-~.
Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Page -2-
March 11th~ 1987
At the March 10th~ 1987 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, a motion
was made by Mr. Hirkala to deny the requested variance based on no proof of
practical difficulty.
Mr. Urciuoli seconded the motion.
Vote:
Mr. Urciuoli - aye
Mr. Hirkala - aye
Mrs. Roe - abstain
Mr. Landolfi - aye
Mr. Cortellino - abstain
The motion was carried.
2!/r-r- ~..~...-~.
George Urciuoli~ Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
GU/lb