606
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TO\VN OF \VAPPINGER
ACTION ON APPEAL
Appe:li )/0. ......6.0.6......,..........
Dated ....June....9th.,.....l982
.If
.~~ P?': llant ..~~.~.~....g.~....~.~.~9.-.~E~.~.L..?:.9..1:'?::t.ng...b.~.~.p...~.......... Address ..._. ..'r..9w.n....9.f....W.e:ppJ.~g.~:r::..r........
...... ....T.o.wn...Hal.l.,.....Mill....s.t.re.et.,.....p.~Q.......B.ox....3.24.,.....Wapping.er.s....Falls.,....NY.......1259D......
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on ...................g,.~~~.....?:t:p..................................................., I9..?~..,
A??e2.1l\o~..........\5..9.9........ wa} considered and the follo\v:ng action on the request for: 0 A V.1..RIA:\CE,
0:\ SPECIAL USE PERMIT, KI AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZO~I:\G ORDI:\A~CE)
o :L'\l' APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSO;\' (S)) was taken:
I. V:\.RIANCE: By resolution of the Board, it was determined that strict appEcat:on of the Ordi::ance
o would 0 would not produce undue hardship for these re:l.sons:
a. The property in question 0 would 0 would not yield? reasonable rett;rn if limited to the
use permitted under the Ordinance, became: ..................................................................................._................._.........
........................................... ................................. ..................... ...... ....... .... .... ....u............. .'" .... ....... ........ .......... ..u...............u.........................__.........
b. The hardship created 0 is 0 is not unique and 0 would 0 \yould not be sha:ed by all
properties alike in the vicinity of the property and in the same use district, be:ause: ..................
.................................................................................................................................................................u........_..........................................._..........
.................................................................................................... ...... .........................................................................-.............--..................-.-....-
c. The variance 0 would 0 w:1uld not change the character of the district, becau~e: ........._.........
...............................................................................................................................................................................................-...-..................-..........
................................................................n.n................................ ... ........ ................... .., ...... ................................................................._.........._.........
'.'. ..
Therefore) it was further detertnined that the requested variance 0 be g,a~td 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 L~e Board it was determined tha~ the req1.:est ror a
Special Use Permit 0 be granted 0 be denied, pursuant to article ......................., sectio:! or subse:ton
..................., paragraph .................................... of the Zoning Ordinance and, therefore, the decision of the En-
forcement Officer 0 be reversed 0 be confirmed) because: ........................................................................_.....................
..... _........~u............. ................. ...... ......... ......... ........ '" ...... ............ ......... ........ ..... ......... .... ... 'H~" .... ..... ......... .... .... ....... ..... ........................................ .............._......._..
. _. ...... ........ ... ................. .................................................................................................... ........... ................... .......... ....u. ........ .... u'" ........_..._....... ............_.... ........
3. I:-;TERPRETATION: The Board adopted the following resolution ~.....h;ch ~tatcd its inte:-pretlt:on
of the Zoning Ordinance as requested in your appe:d: ....A.....'.'.F.oster..Home'.'...i.s.:a...home..contain_
ing.. ..t.WQ......(. ~J..... J9.S. .t~ ~... .P9.:r;: ~.P..t. .~.l.....m.9. ~.~ ,te. <:1.. ..t.<?... .t?.9. G.b... .Q.t.b..~ :r::..r..... <3.11 q.. . h 9.Yi...P9.. ..D.9.... ._....
roor e....tha.n....f.our.....unr.e.l.at.e..d..Ghi.l.gx.~n. ..13 s.. Jo.s. t.e.+' ....GhJ.l. <:1,l;".~.n. ..:t.9.g.et.h.~.r... .j? i.~p'..
any...na.tur.a1....chi.l.dr.e.n...th~y...h9y~..~... ....... . ......... ...................... ......................._......
~. .-\GGRIEVED PERSON (5): By n~solution of tht; Boa=-d, the foJ:,)',ving dec:s:o:: w:'.s i.1a.:e 0l'1 your
!'~peal: ...................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................p..........~..0............./r()........._--
~ · W-a~-=.J
....._....~.. .........~. .........~-.... ....... .. ....................-.........
~.' Z' D d r, t
Lh:llrm:>.n) Qnmg IYY1r or .n..ppe:!:_3
~..~... .,-"--
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Appeal ~o. 6d h
Date ,,~;y1 <--1
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
;,:ppellant4hNS &v.N&"2.(uL . .~,::~::iling
S~",..j. \~~iJ-4W 2~,~~,"""rw~Iw'\'-\;S~~~" Phone # Z3t7 - G 1.. \0.
\,I 11 \ \.
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS:
I, ft4N; r;.'I./I~ '?,.i1.L~ . appeal from a decision of the
Zoning Inspector, dated , 19___, and do hereby apply to the
Zoning Board of Appeals for,DA VARIANCE, OA SPECIAL USE PERMIT. ~A..'l n;TER-
PRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, DAN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSO~nS) . (check
. proper one), in connection with premises located-at
,
(street & no. )
, Town of Wappinger, N.Y'.
(zoning dist.)
(grid no.)
1. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED
(article, 'section or subsection and paragraph)
2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Co~plete rel~vant section). *
a. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED for the following reasons:
I} 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:
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. INTERPRETATION of the Zoning Ordinance is requested because:-rh( '~i~
\l -r-= . LLL ",.\, )). . 11<:::, . \ ~\ '-N.. ^ L"-L '. ,~ . Jt-. \.. .
"f,:l) \C4' n::'~\'::.; VoN"J t( tv'IV"': \:-\ \" I ne (Xe- \\ iV\ \\''':'''\ S'tC \\""':'- \, 1~Zt..) ) .~ S- it, b .r-::~ r-
.-+0 (\v~\{ el\..ft.>f"~. 'rJ'\e~~:~",,~~.s - ~t:v-\'~C;'Al..~. l~ ~\"-CS~ ~ C\.5S I~ t- N\t..' .'
V..I v....~\:-./ ~....s t1;v' c.V ~'<'.''';''T I' ""~t-S vv~~ l.}'\.\.(, "lC"J..i'Vt. Sec. q-\.;' J.. n. I iI ~ r. .
d. AGGR~EVED PERSON(S) a~appeal 1S requested because: ~~, ~ \~'~~/~J~ \~~~j
3. OTHER REMARKS:
. . W /1 A
) .11/1 ,1/ A'. (1 r/
(U 3 e extra sheets if nece s s a ry) Signa ture I i l(.li v/ i ~v ~ \~ _ c,-"__,i
. " . ,"'1 I - - !
* The requ~red plan must accompany tha Notlce of Appeal.'
AP?ELLA~TS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CO~""'1.S PiVOLVED T..r PUroLISH"'NG THn::o
v. ....44 'D ..L, u:. ReQUIReD
~"":"'r::,)i. ~.;r,-"":'"'~("'-=, T'T ""'1".J'1:t T('\,......~T "T"":'--r-'""'.... """)"::",
CORBALLY, GARTLAND AND RAPPLEYEA
~s anb OloWStlors at Jatu
CHA~LES oJ. CORilAUr (I9455)
..10M'" ~. GARTLAJtO, ..IR.
A1.LAX E.. PA"PLE"U
:>ANIEt. F_ CURTIN'
~REOw_SCHAE"FER
JON ..OUlt,. ADANS
W1CHAE1. G. GAlrrLANO
VINCE..,. L OU!lASE
PAUL O. SUI-Ll......,..
BARDAVON BUILDING
3S MARKET STREET
FLORIDA OFF'ICE:
1499 GULF'-TO-eAr BOULEVARD
CLEARWATER, F'LORIDA 33516
813-461-3'_
POUGHKEEPSIE. NEW YORK 12601
914'454-1110
STEPHEN G. WATTS, 01'" COUNSEL"
"MENBER 0" "LOR.OA BAR ONLY
wlLTO" N. HAVEN
JOSE;>W F. H.......K''''S.
C.-:OU..5EL
BRANCH OF'F'ICE:
..
BANK OF' MILLBROOK BUILDING
F'RANKLlN AVENUE
MILLBROOK, NEW YORK 12545
914 -677-5539
....t:...N..a ...y..u.D F"1..C.1DA .....
March 10, 1982
To"'wn Board
Town of Wappinger
~appinger Falls, New York 12590
Re: St Cabrini Home
Dear Members of the Board =
The purpose of this letter is to respond to an inquiry made at a
recent meeting with St. Cabrini and to also address a letter of Hans
Gunderud to myself dated February 25, 1982. Both seek clarification
of the question as to whether a "group home" is a "foster home" under
the town's zoning ordinance.
Lnder the provisions of the Social Services Law, there exists an
ambiguity as to whether there is a distinction between the term
"group home" and "foster home." The term "group home" is defined by
Social Services Law ~371, subd. 17, which defines such as a facility
for the care and maintenance of not less than seven or more than ten
children, who are at least five years of age and which is operated by
an authorized agency. By contrast, the term "foster home" is not
defined by the Social Services Law, but the term "foster parent" is
defined under So cial Services Law ~ 371', subd. 19 as meaning a person
with whom a child is placed for temporary or long-term care.
;'.dditionally, Social Services Law S 392 defines "foster care" as care
?rovided to a child in a foster family, group home, agency, child
care institution or any combination thereof.
You will recall that our zoning ordinance provides in part that
a family includes a "foster home under the jurisdiction of a public
agency. . ."
CORBALLY, GARTLAND AND RAPPLEYEA
Town Bo ard
Pag e - 2 -
March 10, 1982
In view of the foregoing, there exists a substantial questi~n as
to whether the term "foster home" is different from the term lIgroup
home.lI h1 argument could be made that a foster home is one in which
a foster parent resides. However, one could also argue that a foster
home is one in which foster care is provided. A court could
reasonably find that an ambiguity exists as to the use of the term
"foster home" and in such instance, any doubts would be resolved
against the town rater than in its favor.
Several steps could be taken by either the board or Hans that
might be helpful. Hans might consider requesting an interpretation
of the term "foster home" from the zoning board of appeals. That
board's decision could be helpful if it narrowly defines the term so
as to limit it to homes with foster r~rents or other indices of a
natural family. COurts do give credence to opinions of the zoning
board of appeals although it need not treat the same as binding.
The town board could also remove the ambiguity by more precisely
defining the term so as to limit its application. If it did so, such
interpretation would not affect existing homes. The board must also
be mindful that there appears to be a judicial bias against
restrictions which narrowly limit the presence of group homes in
residential areas.
1 would also observe that 1 do not necessarily consider the
rotation of lIhouse parents" on a 60-hour shift basis to be overly
significant. As 1 indicated in my letter to you of December ,
1981, it appears that the courts have shifted in their focus from
inquiry as to whether or not the home has the structure of the
traditional family to that of a focus on the objective of the gruop
home program.
Very truly yours,
CORBALLY, GARTLAND & RAPPLEYEA
Jon Holden Adams
J HAl 1 h
cc: Hans Gunderud