941
\ \, (
. ~ /lIt.{ ~-1 r
~/\J'"" ( -z;-p. ...
\ TOWN OF WAPPINGER
<
c:c ~OTICE OF APPEAL
...
Appellant
Jerry Druker
~ APPeal~o. g Ll I
DateUf+ I t r,~ )RC{( ~
R.D. 2, Box 622
Christine Ct.
Home Mailing Stormville, NY
Address
.
Zip Code: 12582
Tel.#: 221-9565 (H)
TO TIlE BOARD OF APPEALS:
I, Jerry Drucker ,appeal from a decision of the Zoning Inspector, dated
August 25 .19~.anddoherebyapplytotheZoningBoardofAppealsfor: 0 A VARIANCE, 0 A
SPECL.u VSE PERJ\.1IT, lYi AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 AN APPEAL AS AN
AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) (check proper one), in connection with premises located at U. S. Route 9
(street & no.)
(zoning dist.)
6158-04-530446
HB-2A
(grid no.)
. Town of Wappinger, N.Y
1. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED I nterpretat i on of the word
"use" in the definition of a "Lot" (Article II, Section 200, Subsection 220)
(article. section or subsection and paragraph)
2. lYPE OF APPEAL (Complete relevant section). *
~. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED for the following reasons:
1) Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would produce undue hardship because:
2) The hardship created is unique and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property
and in this district because:
3) The variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and would not change the character of the district
because:
o INTERPRETATION of the Zoning Ordinance is requested because: (See attached sheet)
d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested because:
3. OTHER REMARKS:
(Use extra sheets if necessary)
Signature
.-
· The required plan must accompany the Notice of .Appeal.
APPELLANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING THE REQUIRED LEGAL
NOTICE IN THE LOC..u NEWSPAPER.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ACfION ON APPEAL
AppeiU No. 941
Dated November 3rd, 1986
. Appellant
Jerry Druker
Address RD 2 - Box 622 - Christine Court
Stormville, NY 12582
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on October 14th, ,19 86 , Appeal No. 941
was conSidered and the following action on the request for: 0 A VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, ~ 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:
~ -- - ..;.
, ~,
b. The hardship created 0 is C 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:
'f
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance 0 be granted 0 be denied and that the previous
decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 be confirmed 0 be reversed.
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: Highway Business is one use.
4. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S): By resolution of the Board, the following decision was made on your appeal:
1/;:;//?-i'JL'c.
hair an, Zoning Board of Appeals