952 ~ t . TO\VN OF \'APPL~GER /)' ,jl.. (.1 \j}_~ NOTICE OF APPE.A.m~"'!.:"'\I""') \- 'f\J./~~J Appeal No. C, ~. d- n~ -L . 4# r- '"'If Dat~ Get: - . I ! '1 \~ It:"' 1 Appellant Eileen (Pigliacampi) Fay Wappingers Falls, New York NUIJ 1 J 1986 fLAlHE HI SNOIJV.ijijlme t-.lailing 'j~3dr~s 1 Fenmore Drive Zip Code: 12590 Tel. #~97-2606 TO TIIE nOAJU} OF APPEALS: I, Eileen (Pigliacampi) Fay . appeal from a decision of the Zoning Inspector, dated /6.) / n; , 19~, and do hereby apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for: ~ A VARIANCE, 0 A I SPECIAL USE PERMIT. 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 ~ APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEV'ED PERSON(S) (check proper one), in connection with premises located at ,,-d..1'VP -,~ . /_~cA... R-40 /'1- (;~e;'. ~/ . ff;z.S/+. 00 . Town ofWappinger:s~~;nc.) (wrung dist.) (gIld no.) 1. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED Article IV Section 412 to allow for the subdivision of a lot into 3 lots where said lots will not have legal road ~rontage. (article. section or sub'ICCtlon and p~ra!Uaph) 2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Complete relevant section).. a. A V.o\RIANCE 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 properry 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: b. A SPECL~ USE PERMIT IS REQUESTED pursuant to article . section or subsection , paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the following use on the above premises: c. DITERPRETATION of the Zoning Ordinance is requested because: d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested because: 3. OTHER REMA.RKS: (Use extra sheets if necessary) Signature f ~~ /S---;. .~~ .1- '-' ยท The required plan must accompany the Notice of Appeal. APPELLANTS ARE REsp6NSIBLE FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING THE REQUIRED LEGAL l'OTlCE IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF WAPPINGER ACTION ON APPEAL Appeal No. 952 Dated November 19th, 1986 Appellant Eileen (Pigliacampi) Fay Wappinger Falls, NY 12590 At ameetingoftheZoning Board of Appeals on November 18th ,19 86 , Appeal No. 952 was considered and the following action on the request for: ex A VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 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 ofthe 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 1 Fenmore Drive 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 [Xl be granted 0 be-denied and that the prevfous decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 be-ooffiifffieEl.-OO be reversed. 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: fh./j/./~ Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals . Page -2- November 19th, 1986 At the November 18th, 1986 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, a motion was made by Mr. Landolfi to grant the requested variance based on the fact that he feels it conforms to our current zoning laws to 1 acre. Also, due to the fact that he thinks the hardship has been the fact also that she would be denied legal right and she has been paying taxes 30 some years on it. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cortellino. Vote: Mr. Caballero - nay Mr. Cortellino - aye Mr. Urciuoli - aye Mr. Landolfi - aye Mr. Hirkala - nay The motion was carried. fP!~J~ Angel Caballero, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals AC/lb