564
RECE/~tD
~~~I-k-i981
ELAINE H. SNOWDEN'
Appellant ..!I9.:nn....J...~.....~....M.9.;!;'.:1:1y..n....~..~.....f.J9.;:.~.f.....~.;:..~.......... Address........J.Q....G.9.lg....E.9.~.9........._..................
...........w.sp.p.;i.ng.~~.s.....F..9.1.1Ji?.......m........l.,.5..~Q...................................................................................................................__........................
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on .................septelI\b.ex;.....8t.h.................................:........., ! 9...8.1...)
Appeal No..........5.6.4....... was ronsidered and the following action on the request for: 0 A VARIANCE,
o A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE,
IQl AN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S), was taken:
,
/If
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TO\VN OF \V APPINGER
ACTION ON APPEAL
Appeal No. ..._....5.6.4...............
Dated .S.~~.t.~mQ..~*_l.Qt.h, 198:
..
I. VARIANCE: By resolution of the Board, it was determined that strict appliC2.tion of the Ordinance
o 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 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: ..................
..............-......____._...a.....aau..aa......................a.....................a..a_........................a.........._............................._.....................__......__....._......
...................:.......................................a.................................a.a.................................................a.......................lh...............-......-..._._..........14...._
c. The variance 0 would 0 would not change the character of the district, because: ,_ .................
........................a.........a........................................................................................................................................................_........._..__........__
........................................................................................................ ..........................................................................._...l............__.....~....._....._.....
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance Q-be-gmR-t-eG (1g be denied and
that the previous decision of the Enforcement Officer llil be confirmed EJ-ee-l'e'r'e.rsed: 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 En-
forcement Officer 0 be reversed D be confirmed, because: ......................................................_......_........._.................
/ .
......................................................................-................................................................................................................................................-....-.........-.
......................................................................................................................-..............................................................._..........................-....-..--.......--...
J. INTERPRETATION: The Board adopted the following resolution which stated its interpretation
of the Zoning Ordinance as requested in your appeal: ............................................................................................................
.............n.....u.............................................................................................._.........................................................................................................................-......
.. ,................................... .....................................................................................
.......................,...........,..............................................
;. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S):' By r~olution of ~::e Board, the fcllow:ng decision was made on your
~pe3.l:
....................-.... ........................................................................................
......................'..........-....................................................
..... ........~..................................
kVmm
CLo;~.-" Z~~:"'T~" ~-l ~ ~ .'~_ "
.1~1. ....1.., ~.J.....~ J_l.u v.. . i.;,.,...1..~
~ .
NOTICE 0::' APPE.i\.L
Date
';)&,
..
---1
'..
Appe).iant_~ John J. N Marily~ E. Fiore. Sr.
-'
Address 10 Gold Road
Wappinqers Falls. NY 12590
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS:
I, -, btjl.l ::r. ~ Al.t'Hl-l \j J ? hell!: f, ~., appea 1 from a deci sian of the
~1). "D I P(J~J1LS . - ~
zoning 4nspde-tor, aated ~\..~) ,19~, and do hereby apply to the
Zoning Board of Appeals for:DA VARIANCE,DA SPECIAL USE PERMIT, DAN lNTER-
PRETATIO~ . OF THE ZONnTG ORD~CE, JZ1AN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON (5). (check
proper one), in connection with premises located a';- )<2 ~ ~ t..i) t?c:>.
(street & no.))
, T~Nn of wappinger, N.Y.
Jl{D
(z'oning dist.)
,
b;;;S-O-01-QJ + <(6 J
(grid no.) .
1. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALBD ;lt27iCi-~ ~ -
. S82, 1jri.J .'
(art~cle, section or subsection and parag~aph)
2. TYPE OF APPEAL. (coIPplete relevant section). *
a. A VARIA:N'CE 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 characte~ of the district because:
b. A SPECL~L USE PEffi1IT IS REQUESTED pursua~tto article , section
or subsection , paragra?!l of the Zoning Ordinance
to per@it the following use on the above p~emises:
c. INTERPrtETATION of the Zoning Ordinance lS yequested because:
d. hGGRIEVED PERSON(S) un appeC11 is rcaueste(~ecc:us0~.:..._~__-, .
(1 ((~L{ hi - .~ e lZ ~- 11 ~ f) PI"> G . A-~; l"f {2 (' I( A btt'i-1J
J ____ . .. I .--
J~~ c"_,-Q. (n~: A..) -rrl dT; 0 IV ~. ,
3. (ll': ~~~? Y'~~~'~.:"'.r~r~S:
\
\,... .
~,1'~ l-equirE::d plan rnu~t a<,:co:~.f>~~ny t!:~ 2~otice o~
\
\:~7~ #\~=: l~ES~O:';S T~LI: rO!l '~:r:; CO:;~:.;
J-.
<nk)
!~~l0:...,,"=u :~: 1J~;~r r- 1I~.:G 7~7 ~ .'1"\.., ''''t' ~"'n
.. .. - ... '. ..... .. _, ..~t~ _ :. -. J
. -.-. -- - - -.----- ---_.---~ - .------ ..--..------------------.--------.----.-
(Use ext~~ sheets if ncces3~ry)
$1<;..?::. t:.::-:::
" ..... ~. I. ..; -." :;~. J-' --~
Appeal # 564
-2-
September 10th, 1981
.
~
At the September 8th, 1981 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting,
Mr. Landolfi moved that the requested variance be denied as the
property in question would yield a reasonable return and the hardship
created is not unique. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cortellino.
Roll Call Vote:
Mrs. Waddle - aye
Mr. Landolfi - aye
Mr. urciuoli - aye
Mr. cortellino - aye
Mr. Mc Millen - aye
The motion was unanimously carried.
(Mrs.) Carol A. Waddle, Chairperson
~
PllTLTION
DATED
JULY 313 1981
TO:
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND Z0HIH~ BOARD
TOWN OF WAPPINGERS
FROM:
RESIDENTS OF GOLD ROAD3 PANOR~~ ESTATES3
WAPPINGERS FALLS3 NEW YORK
----------------~-~-~~~-~-~~~~~~~-----------~-~-~---------
WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE NEIGHBORS WHO RESIJE IN CLOSE
PROXIMITY TO THE FIORE PROPERTY OF TEN G0~D ROAD HAVE
NO OBJECTION TO THE CONTINUED STORAGE OF SAID BOAT IN
THE AFOREMENTIONED DRIVEWAY.
BE IT KNOWN THE AFOREMENTIONED BOAT3 IN OUR OPINION3
DOES NOT DEFACE OR CREATE AN UNPLEASING APPEARANCE TO
THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
o GJ~~"~'''' ~ m- i~-
'1 I! ;' .
I ' "#
"(/ ':,\/1./ '::--, (I ~
i /,{ -f~' / -? -( !(_
)/ (.
1/
I
/
\,
/ r
/",/
/
/
/
.~ . / l .
iljt,V: "~
I G L'Jf, L~ /b '
(' / ,~/
\ // '-~, '."
/ < .'~',>!. ~ / {' /;":' r "t 1/: ," ',: ." -.
.;(~ /C'{
.
';;.
LETTER OF APPEAL
DATED: JULY 31~ 1981
TO: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
FROM:
JOHN J. AND MARILYN E. FIORE~ SR
TEN GOLD ROAD~ PANORAM ESTATES
.
WAPPINGERS FALLS~ NEW YORK
"
, ....... "'.... '"
... ... .....-~-~-.~. '" ~.... .:-.......
We~ the abovestated~ wish to appeal the July
decision of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Board's decision
regarding our boat on trailer which is parked in our
driveway at a lesser setback than ten .(10) feet from the
adjacent property line for the following reasons:
l. Our driveway (which .has a side door entrance to our
garage door has been established since 1961 when we
originally b~ilt our home. We chose to have our garage
door positioned on the side of house so as not to deface
the neighborhood nor our professionally landscaped yard.
In order to relocate said boat to comply with set back .
restrictions established in 1963 we would have to disturb
and destroy our landscaped propertu worth in excess of~
$5~000 since 1962. We would have to remove very expensive
blue spruce~ crab apple~ dogwoods and removal and re-
placement.of Southwest side of sod lawn.
In addition~ the land area on the Southwest portion
of our property contain.!!...._t..~~_'Le_q,c_h f'ieZd.s.~Qr OU1" septic
system. This pastyear~ 1980~'we h~d t~ ~~ve our Zeach
fields rebuilt and expanded at a cost in excess of $2~000.
Storing of the boat in this location wouZd create a major
problem to our installed leach fields. ~~is could create
a sewage back-up into our adjacent finished playroom in
our basement which had been damaged in 1980.
~~
;.
Page 2
J. J. & M.E. Fiore
2. FINANCIAL HARDSHIP:
,
To utilize the area at the end of our driveway CNorth-
east~ which contains a row of hedges dividing the drive-
way from a shady elavated patio~ a side walkway to rear
entrance to house~ railroad tie wall and steps to lower
level plus entrance to lower pool area; it would necessi-
tate the following destruction.
(a) Removal of an established hedge since 1962 -
Value:$200.00
CbJ Removal ofa 20 year old 20 foot sprucetree~
a l5 foot dogwood tree~ and a 30 foot maple
tree. Valu$1400.00
(c) Removal of a 3 foot railroad tie retaining wall
containing steps to lower level of landscaped
triangular shrubbed areas containing yews~
aborvitae and hostras plus 20 foot spruce tree.
Value: $700.00 .
Cd) Fill would have to be brought in and graded with
a bull dozer. Cost: $800.00
Ce) Reconstruction of the walkway to the rear entrance
of our home/backdoor and relocation of the steps
to the lower level pool area and backyard.
Cost: $2000.00
We sincerely feel that either alternative of Northeast
or Southwest exposures~ as described above~ would create
an undue financial and physchological hardship in excess
of $8~OOO for labor~ equipment~ sod Zawn~ trees~ shrubs~
paiio~ walks and railroad tie walls and or leach field
areas
3. ADDITIONAL FAMILY HARDSHIF:
Family LeisureJPl~s~r~~iv8rsion (BOAT)
Boat owned for 14 years to acc~~~odate family leisure/
p lea 3 u I' e sin c e chi l d r en 0) ere you n e . :',' -9 ;;:: -: Z Zen.j 0 y the
divers~-:'i from our everyday busi'iC2,~ ~ ~ ,:;;. ';ak~~ng U;e
boat away from our life would crea~e an undue hardship for
our "TOTAL" family.
CoZleae Education Expenses
., .-,_._- --- ----
We are presently financing our 2;n'3 ~oZlege edu~ation
a t the > i ve Y'S 'i t Y 0 fRo c h :: 3 t r3!1 :J. t .. . ~. 3 :; :~ <~ 7 0 J 0 0 0 !_ e l'
year. ;/e are not ,in an'Lj finanC!-ia:. :- ~2-~ :;~~(z -:;0 b()2}1~O:J
additional money to red'es~~gn our ;l~-J?-?r-'::. to :lccommodate our
"
Page '3
J.J. & M.E. FIORE
3. ADDITIONAL FAMIbY,RARBSHIPS,(CONT'D.l
College Edu~a~iq~~~~~', fqONT:B:)
boat~ which has been owned since 1967 without any com-
plaints by the one complaining neighbor for all these
years (said complaining neighbor has lived next to us
for 19 year.)
.
Our 1961 driveway has been established to acco,'''1odate
vehicles. The side entranced garage door does necessi-
tate an ample swing to maneuver our cars into ourtvo-
car garage -- that being the reason for the said location
of our boat and trailer~ for the last five (5) years.
Previous Vand~l~~m'~~upa~cy' of Boat
Previously when our boat was stored on the southwest
side ~f our property~ vandalism occurred. Boating equip-
ment was stolen~ various boating articles were destroyed
plus individuals were sleeping in the enclosed boat~ due
to the secluded and unlighted area of the s~uth west side
of our property which is also the location of our leach
fie lds.
So as to not have this reoccurrence~ it was deemed
necessary to return the said boat and trailer to our
driveway area to be in close proximity to our hou8e~ in
a lighted area and discourage such problems from existing.
The boa t is' a lso amp ly and adeq uate ly s creene d from ad-
jacent property~ property line and road.
We~ therefore~ wish to appeal your decision by'enter-
ing the above-mentioned information for your attention and
understanding, There is a discrepancy in the property
line~ as presented by our surveyor~ of approximately one
foot. ':fJterefore~ we would be in agreement to move said
boat and trailer two additional feet which would give a
total of 5-6 feet set-back from questioned property line
that boat is bordering.
Thanking you for your consideration.
V~ry. ':'l~~. yo rs~
/' ,/ / /
./ If ,./~
/, , ~
JOH'~8.-' F;f1JRE~ SR
v' ,/'
,/