551
c'
. .J
'tr!
RECEIVED
'JUL 1 6 1981,
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TO\VN OF 'V APPINGER
AcrION ON APPEAL
Appeal No. 55:t.~
Dated .]Jd.!l~ 24tp., 19~1
Appellant ~~~t~~'~~'~~~~~~~~~'::!'~~~'::~~_~~":'H'_'__H'__ Addres!.'H~'~':"~~Y":"~::'~~=!___'__
~.Q)J.t!t.1!~~lj..!}~.ltQ!l,_y.~!.~9n.t.._Q.~~qLJ.EE.<?.P_~~t~_~~_~~~H!!Y.~E:?__~.2E~~2. ~ ,'. .
. Wappingers Falls,NY)
At a meeting. of the Zoning Board of Appeals on "H...JHUl.~.~&th"H_'''''H''''''''''''''''''''H''''H'''H'''''''_) J 9.flJ-~
Appeal No.....?~..~............. was considered and the following action on the request Ear: B A VARIANCE,
o A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE,
o AN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S), was taken:
J. VARIANCE: By resolution of th~ Board, it was determined that strict :1pplic:uion of the Ordinance
f&I would 0 · · . produce undue hardship for these reasons:
a. The property in question 0 ~ would not yield a. reasonable return if limited to tbe
use perntitted under the Ordinance, because: ........_.H....H...HH..__:..._.____ -:--
_____________._......._._......_______..__.._.__"L"...l. ~..d.
b. The hardship created~ is 0 . - unique and 0 . . pgc would not be shared. by all
properties alike in the vicinity of the property and in the same use district, because: ........_
-.-.--.--.-.-..-'!...-...--.--..-....--...-.....---...----..--....... ~--.-....
-----:-0.0:------.---....-...-......-.....--..--...--..-......-............-............-.--.-...-
k
c. 'The variance 0
,. ~ would not change tbe character of the district, because: .__........~
----.......-.-.,.-.-......................-....-.-..............--...-.:...................................---.--....--...--."--.---"-.'--"-'-
-.--...-.---.---.-............-.......-....--...--.-............-.......................:.............--....-..---...._...-..------~-
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance @ be granted. 0 t · . 1 and
that the previous. decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 · ~ .l~ be reversed.
2. SPECIAL USE PERMIT: By resolution of the Board it was determined that the request for :1
Special Use Permit 0 be granted 0 be denied, pursuant to article ._........._......_, section or subsection
-......-J paragraph ..............H.................... of'the Zoning Ordinance and, therefore, the decision of the En-
lorcement Officer 0 be reversed 0 be confirmed, because: .............._..H.......HH._....__...........
-~......_-_..._...--_......._-_......-._......_......_......-.--..-..-.-...---....-................-....---.---.....-
3. INTERPRETATION: The Board adopted the following resolution which stated its interpretation
of the Zoning Ordinance as requested in your appe:11: .....................................H.............H...........H.......__...H_......_'__H
.............................................-............................................................ ............. ........................................ .......................................................-.-.......--......---.
.. .........................................................................................................-......... ... ................................ ...........................................................-..-....................---
4- AGGRIEVED PERSON (5): By resolution of the Board, the following dec:sion was made on your
appeal: ............................................................................................................................................................................................--..._.._.._H.
..... .............................................................................. ..... .............................. ............................... .........h.......__........................................._..__....._._.........__.
.---.-.-.....-....--.--.-..-..-..---...-..----...~7?~.=-
...................................~...?................................-...........-...--....
Chairrmn, Zoning Boord of App~ls
....
TaRN OF WAPPINGER
Appeal No. ....!J'--S- J
.
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Date b /-J V~o/
/ /
-Appellant PIZZAGALLI DEVELOPMENT CCMPANY
Address
50 Joy Drive
South Burlington Vermont 05401
TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS:
I Wilfred A. Rohde
,
, appeal from a decision of the
zoning Inspector, dated
June 24
, 19~, and do hereby apply to the
zoning Board of Appeals for:[!]A VARIANCE,[:lA SPECIAL USE PERMIT,t:]AN INTER-
PRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE,E:lAN APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S). (qheck
proper one) I in connection with premises located at Mvers Corners Road
(street & no.)
, Town of Wappinger, N. Y .
PI-lA
(zoning dist.)
,
6258-03-350303
(grid no.)
1. PROVISION(S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED Article 1'1 - Section473.2(472.2)
To allow 9'X18' parking stalls with 24' wide manuvering aisles where 10'X20' parking
stalls with 25' manuvering aisles are required.
(article, section or subsection and paragraph)
2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Co~plete relevant section). *
a. A VARIANCE IS REQUESTED "for the fOllowing reasons:
1) strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would produce undue
hardship because:
(1) Users standards require parking spaces 9'X18' with 24' aisles.
(2) Irregular shape of property limits the number of spaces possible without
severely impacting green spaces.
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:
(1) This is an office complex and not for retail use. There is no need for
oversized spaces.
3) The variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and would not
change the character of the district because:
(1) Design standards allow for smaller parking stalls and aisles due to today's
smaller cars. Refer to attached sketches and reference material
b. A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS REQUESTED pursuant to dr"ticle , 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. OTHER REMARKS:
(Use extra sheets if necessary) Signatur
Consu tant or Pizzagalli
· The required plan must accompany the Notice of Appeal. '
APPEI.LANTS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHI~JG THE
LEGAL NOTICE IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPER.
Devel. Corp.
,...,....""U-rR ~jl ~
~t:.v l. tfrYtu...
.
, ,
. ,
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
CONSTRUCTION
Harlow C. Landphair
Fred Klatt, Jr.
Department of Landscape Architecture
Texas A&M University
:P jtf1t:f
tI
ELSEVIER · NEW YORK
NEW YORK. OXFORD
. ~ - '
---
. 8'6 CIRCULATION DESIGN
for parking and the number of vehicles that will re-
quire storage. Figure 2-10 below and on page 87
illustrates the four basic parking arrangements.
Parking schemes of 300 and 450 are most frequently
used when the width of the parking area is restrict-
ed. 300 parking with double bays can be accom-
plished comfortably in a space as narrow as 46 ft
(14 m), 450 parking requires a 50 ft (15.2 m) width.
The circulation for 300 and 450 parking will normal-
ly be one-way. Maneuvering in and out of 300 or
*
-d)
-
\
~
v
\'I
~lo~ ffZ ~~
~~~ l--l ~ ~,6J...l,....
{
_t}~l
I
I
t
~~
-4Zt5 ~~ ~~
~~""l hl6 5~
~
~
\\
\.
,
~$I.
I
1 -
FIGURE 2-10