869
, ..' ; . 4'-
~
" TOWN OF WAPpiNGER'> .., ,.,-'",~.;,.:iE:;;'SJvlr~A peaINo> ,xta'?
." Non'lSffW~PEAL' "IX:t" " ,n:. \ -'t I "~t..
,~'!:';~:::~~P'~';~.1~~~i;;~.....J/';:~J?!2!..f<:: .,'.._ ..:~~~..,.__~~ ~~'2.a~&?~ .
A~~.il~~.i\.\~~~;" .....;{:_:~~LL~::;i~t~"Q:;~~1
"'_...u --"'-ZipCode: tz~o' .... Te1.'=-lf'/~3gE
.,;;.- , "t:' 'r'.
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: ' .. " ;. ; ;. ,le ' , '.", ,:" .-. .. . _ ,. .10
I, U~~~~~ '., J..\', ~ ,.,' ~ 'appeal from a;eclsion of the Zoning Inspector, ~ed
, ..l a ~ v Q...t" 't-- ' 19~ , and do hereby apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for: 0 A VARIANcE, 0 A '
SPECIAL USE PERMI'r, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF TIIE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 AN APPEAL AS AN
AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) (check proper one), in connection with premises located at ~ ~..'~~ e,t
" '" . . . . (street &: no.)
~t3 . ee" ts ~ - ~ -57Lt ~15 , TownofWappinger,N..Y .
(zoning dist.) (arid no.) :-':, _ ..:.. . .;. .
,.',,-'. '''''''^ ..:; ..'...,..... -._",.,.~', , ..;;, -I~" "'~':-"'I!!i'''''''''~:~~'''""",,,d. '~'!;;;...,-: --~~'''''~''<:::''~''''~.i;::'AiIlo;.;.~'''''-''''li,;iIIl;.!,~~___'__ ~:.'~";!',-.... ,It,-'''a~....,..,,,l>>j,?,::,,,,~,~-,.,, .,.... '.~, _..""..~.. _.....:..:_;~~,___..._..~_"'".._.
'.....',-;~,. '~";"",~:~,,':,,.~ .j:;~ . . .... '~''''-'-- ''-'" -.... . ,.......". -..... .---~
'1. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCEAPPWm ~-noA,) 427 G B . I"'?'~":
CO\\l - r Vtr' 0... ~ -t '\~d:\:"'\~"Y'
, , J'article scctio orsub . nandparagraph) ~.'.
- \Ja.('"\euc:::.-e r~\JE'?-;-e ~ 45) -f~~'-7"~\~<)\L-
2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Complete relevant section). * - ..F :/ '" '.cO> .
. ~ :-"..' \-$
a. A VARlANCEISREQUESTEDforthefollowingreasons:. , ." '. t' ,:'. .'
1) Strict aQPIication of the Zonin$ Ordinance would produce undue hardship because: tJ s~~ 7 6 ~~(. K
v.'..,)\bt-1O~c.e ~&ll..r~\f'S)~~ \QoJ.\A,~%o~-\.\.Jd\ .\~ ~..~,~,..I.)l~~'r 7~ e ...
2) The hardship created is unique and)s not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property
and in this district because: ~cc..e.\ \c..:. ~"""","cUt ~t"EcO -(....0 ~to~('~le~ (~ So.MA ,.
. ~.o"'~.':;;WA..1>~ ()"C'~~('c.-e.( ~"'e...c...f\Jde...s' \A..+e("CL( ~K.~-t~'Qp.J _
3) The variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and would not change the character of the district \. .
, because: 1'ra~ ~ 'os \.,;l c::.e-M.w....-e. ~ _~ 2.&>>..,..... ~ ~ ~. r~ t-)..lr- 0.... ~owtJ '1
.' . ~cl. ~t'{ 50' ~..,(& ~ <".,~'("~..
b. A SPECIAL USE PERMnt IS REQUESTED pursuant to article , section or subsection
, paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the following use on the
above premises:
, c. INTERPRETATION of the Zoning Ordinance is requested because:
d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested because:
3. OTHERREMARKS: ~~\~ ~"'" ~~~e..>"b --\c ~ ~C"o~-e..c9-' o..-\-' ~'e'e-\-l~ f-,Il'tki- .
. . .\ - '
(Use extra shee;s if necessary)
. Signature
· The required pIan m';LSt accompany the Notice of Appeal.
APPELLANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING THE REQUIRED LEGAL .......-
NOTICE IN TIIE LOCAL NEWSPAPER. . . . ...--
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
ACTION ON APPEAL
Appeal No. Rfiq
Dated
March 14th, 1986
Appellant Herbert H. Redl
Route 9, Poughkeepsie, NY
Addr~/o All Sport
12601
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on March 11th ,1986, Appeal No. 869
was considered and the following action on the request for: ~ 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:
:'"':, -..;..;- ;.
."1 ~ .
b. The hardship created 0 is D 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 charact.:r of the district, because:
,.,< ;;;;;;.
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance 0 be.gr.uJ.ted KJ be denied and that the previous
decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 be confIrmed 0 be.~.
SEE ATTACHEMENT.
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:
ffrl/V~
Chafrman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Page -2-
March 14th, 1986
At the March 11th, 1986 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, a motion was
made by Mr. Hirkala to deny the requested variance based on the recommendation of
the Dutchess County Dept. of Public Works in letter dated 3/3/86 and the Dutchess
County Dept. of Planning in a letter dated 2/24/85, both of which are on file, also,
the fact that the property is in 2 zones, there is nothing on the map to show where
the zoning line is, and this is a self inflicted hardship.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Cortellino.
Vote:
Mr. Caballero - aye
Mr. Cortellino - aye
Mr. Urciuoli - abstained
Mr. Landolfi - aye
Mr. Hirkala - aye
The motion was carried.
fh-//V~
Angel Caballero, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
lb