Loading...
689 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RE CEIVED TOWNOFWAPPINGER i'Ul15 I\} ~ :1983 ACI10N ON APPEAL Appeal No. 689 " , ELAINE H. SNOWDEN Dated July 15th~ 1983 Appellant Pi7.7.r1grlll:i nP-'\TP-l npmpnt- romp::lny Address South Bu~lin9ton, Ve~ont 05401 50 JO~t nr; '7~ At a meeting of the Zoning Board ofAppeaJs on July 12th ,19 83 ,AppealNo. was considered and the following action on the request for: XkA VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE PERMI'!; 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 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 IXJ be granted 8-be-denied and that the previous decision of the Enforcement Officer G-beeonflfJ't'te&11l be reversed. PLEASE 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 Ordinan~ as requested in your appeal: 4. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S): By resolution of the Board, the following decision was made on your appeal: k??~- Chainnalr. Zoning Board of Appeals CHAIRPERSON, Appeal # 689 -2- July 15th, 1983 At the July 12th, 1983 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, a motion was made by Mr. Caballero, to grant the requested variance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Urciuoli. Vote: Mrs. Waddle - abstained Mr. Cortellino - aye Mr. Urciuoli - aye Mr. Caballero - aye Mr. Landolfi - aye The motion was carried. /~~I!,v!fla~ ~, (Mrs.) Carol A. Waddle, Chairp~rson br .- TOWN OF WAPPINGER NOTICE OF APPEAL Appeal No.;6 :;:, ? . Date (.a //,--~,h0 Appellant Pizzaqalli Development Company Home Mailing Address 50 Jov Drive South Burlinqton, Vermont Zip Code: 05401 Tel. #: (802) 658-4100 TO TIlE BOARD OF APPEALS: It Wilfred A. Rohde , &ppeal from a declsion of the Zoning Inspector, dated June 2 , 19~ , and do hereby apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for: rn A VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE PERMI'f, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, 0 AN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) (check proper one), in connection with premises located at Myers Corners Road ,street & Ilt..) OR-lOA (zoniDa dist.) 6258-03-278358 (grid no.) , Town of \Vappinger, N.~Y: ~ .. ..,...... .;.. . ':.~ r I. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED ARTICLE IV REGULATIONS; Section 422 Schedule of Regulations for Non-Residential Districts to Allow 50 ft. front yard b k h 150 ft (article, section or subsection and paragraph) set ac were . are required. 2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Complete re!~ant s~ion).. a. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED for the following reasons: I) Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would produce undue hardship because: propos ed bui ld ing is to be located near existing office building facility. 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: this parcel is adj acent to another parcel owned by the appellant and said adjacent parcel is zoned PLANNED INDUSTRY. 3) The variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and would not change the character of the district because: front yard variance is adjacent to a Planned industry zone in which minimum front yard is 50 ft., side yard is 30 ft. and rear yard is 40 ft. b. A SPECIAL 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. IN1ERPRETATION o(the Zoning Ordinance is requested because: d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested because: 3. OTHER REMARKS: (Use extra sheets if necessary) Signature ~ tf {/ &L · The required plan must accompany the Notice of Appeal. APPELLANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR T~E COSTS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING THE REQUIRED LEGAL L'0. N()TTrP IN TI-rn T nrA T NFW~PA PFR /~ . HAYWARD AND PAKAN ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS SURVEYORS DATE: June 6, 1983 HAROLD HAYWARD. P.E. WALTER S. PAKAN. PE. OONALDG. TOMUNS. P.E. WILFRED A. ROHDE. P.E. AOGER A. MASTR!. L-S. JOHN V. KANE III, RA.. AlA PETER R. CANTUNE. PE. TO: Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Hayward and Pakan Associates PROJECT: Office Facilities - Pizzagalli Development Co. Myers Corners Road - Town of Wappinger SUBJECT: Appeals for Front Yard Set back Reduction A reduction in the front yard set back requirement is being sought under this appea 1 . The current zoning of this parcel is OR-lOA. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 150 ft. front yard set back. The front yard of this parcel is adjacent to another parcel owned by the Appellant, Pizzagalli Development Co. This adjacent parcel is zoned Planned Industry, which has a front yard set back requirement of 50 ft. A reduction in the fron~;yard ~et back is being sought for the following reasons: 1. To keep the proposed office building close as possible to the existing office building facilities. 2. To minimize clearing of the site for the construction of the proposed office building and parking facilities. As shown in the attached sketch, the side yard and rear yard set backs will be maximized with the reduction in the front yard set back requirement. The side and rear yards of this parcel are adjacent to a residential district (R-20). It is for the reasons cited above, that we request a variance on this matter. Attached hereto with this appeal is a check for $35.00 for the appeal fee. !ttt?' d o. at_ WAR :hzc Attachment 321 MAIN MALL POUGHKEEPSIE, N.Y. 12601 914 - 454-9440 AREA MAP I'l / .' , f-., . . , , l PRtJJt:C.T toc4 ;l'eN Fko />fJ.fliD OPF/t::"G fAc/~n-/ ?iZZA e;A-t-I-1 'DB/ac pmiUVT c:;u'''PAN7 H,/cPs ~/2.,l./132.s !2CJAD 7tiw/J 5 WAPPI'v~EI2~ JlJ.if. ~ ..... . , .~ ~ ~ 2 <{ ~ , -J ~ \) 0- 11. ~ ~/ ~ lU ~ I- ...... . ~ /' - \ Vl /~ ~ Q I( j.~ \ \ '\\ '; :, . ~ ~.~ ( . III ,'i ~ ~ I ~ 0 , Q.: ...... , ~ ~ \ ' ~ \) \ o~ N~ .~ , \ \ \ ( t'J ~ ) I ) ,..."" ,... ,... .,;'