343
IVErfONING BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF WAPPINGER
,J AN 1 2 19i 7 ACTION ON APPEAL
Appeal No. .........3...3.................
Dated ..J.aA1&&J:y....I-2.,......1917
ElAINE H, SNOWDEN
Ap?ellant ...........~............1A:l9........................................................... Address.......29............clc...ck..Jtoad
.........~~P,P~~.!...,~~.!~."....~.......!.~.$.?9....................................................................:.............................................................................
At a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on .............................................;,a\l.ry....l1-:.........................., 19.1.7-....,
Appeal ~o.....3.43............ was considered and ~he following action on the request for:' 0 A VARIANCE,
o A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZOl\ING ORDINANCE,
ii A!'\ APPEAL AS AN AGGRIEVED PERSON(S), was taken:
I. V ARIA~ CE: By resolution of the Board, it was determined that strict application 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: ..................
c. The variance 0 would 0 would not change the character of the district, because: .....................
..........u.......u.~.u.......................................................................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance 0 be granted 0 be denied and
that the previous decision of the Enforcement Officer 0 be confirmed 0 be reversed.
i. SPECIAL USE PERMIT: By resolution of the Board it was determined that the request for a
S.pecial 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-
iorcement Officer 0 be reversed 0 be confirmed, because: ..............................................................................................."
....................:....-................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................
3. INTERPRETATION: The Board adopted the following resolution which stated its i.nterpretation
of the Zoning Ordinance as requested in your appeal: ............................................................................................................
.
................-.-.--....--.......................................................................................................................................................................................................-...
....................._.~_.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................~........................................................J................... ..........................................................................................................................-..
~ AGGRIEVED PERSON (S): By resolution of the Board, the following decision was made on your
appeal:................!.!:~~....~...~~.~~.~....~~.~.................................................................................................................
.
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................-...
.........................-........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
_....~;:;;.~~;~.~iAPp~;;J~.._.._........
Ji,. .-,: ~
-----
/ A/ cn:,r- // Jl "7 ,
.' .
~~~;f~
T07vYl/~~. . . .
. . . Jl~~~~~~7'~
/fN~2~~' ~~~
U/V? f/~0V1 y ~~/;P?C: ~ ;r~~~
a.'~~~ ~~A/~Y~~/
7~1t'v~, jCh>7t:h-.~ ~
.a-d~~~7~
y~~
7~~~
. . . .
6 Dee. 1976
~.
Z'oning Board of Appeals
Town of Wappinger
Gent1emen:
With regard to 'IIf3' appeal. pr a decision of the Zoning
Administrator to issue a SpeciaJ. Use Permit to a Richard Brown
tor operation ot a medical clinic on a parce1 of land located on
New Hackensack Rd. owned by l'Iax & Anne Ganser and adjacent to my
propert.7' please be advised of the following:
1.) That issuance of this perrdt and the ensuing usa will further
aggravate a hazardous traffic condition as evidenced by the
attendance at the Public Hearing of residents of Dorothy Heights
and communications to the Planning Board trom the Dutchess cty.
Dept. of Public Works and the state1l1ent to the Planning Board
by the Town Higll'wq Supt. that the entrance opposite Dorothy
Heights was hazardous. Apparently' a change in ~e original. plan
recommended by the County was made after representations were
made either by the applicants engineer or the applicant to the
County that there would ba no change in the use ot the property
when in fact the use is being changed trcnn a single family to
a quasi-commerciaJ. with an eighteen car parking lot.
2:) That the site plan before the Planning Board at the time they
recommended issuance of the permit showed entrance at the far
Northerly part of the property when in fact the approva1 being
given was at the Southerly portion and the applicant. s engineer
was allowed. to return to his office and. then return to the
meeting with the correct map at which time the map before the
Board was removed and a corrected map placed on the tab1e which
at no time bad been before the public.
)) That the Chail'Jn8.n of the Planning Board insisted on three occasions
that the Public Hearing was for a SpeciaJ. Use Permit and not :for
Site ~an Approval. which appears to be inconsis.tent with the Town
ot Wa.ppinger Zoning Ordinance.
4:) That denial of this Permit woUld not cDeate a hardship as the
property cou1d continue to be used as a single :faJniJ.y residence
for which it was built and which would continue a use in keep-
ing with the neighborhood and in conformity with the wishes of
of nearby property owners.
S) That in no event does the Planning Board have the legal authority
to recommend the issuance of a Special Use Permit.
I respectf.'ully request that the Zoning Board of Appeals deny
the requested. Permit and reter the application back to the
Planning Board tor a proper Site Plan Hearing and review and
the hope that some thorough examination of the plan might be
made to protect other property owners.
Yours truly,
.~~~
.~. .
'eo
...
/' ~ iY} ...AONH'G BOARD OF APPEALS '13.. .
, f. ... ~()I'. TOWN OF \V APPINGER Appeal No. Y--.........................
4t ~ l?' NOTICE. OF APPEAL .. Date ..lipl?-.k........
Appellant "!r1iCll11~.Ii-:_.f::._Qri.:tl&_-- ~2Y...6!';t!!.jg..&~.&::'iR-,H..&
;:;~(~:--~~~T,&!~:L~J~~-..._.....:.._~._.._._..........:..-...~..-
I (we) ........_.._..rh..a.l1t:1..f.t::S.;......fE.....{..i;:/!...~.Ll.1.1L..:..............-..-:-........) appeal from a decisi~n of the Zoning
. . (name of appellant)
Inspector, dated .......!L........Cl..~.._......~" I9..~..2C.., and do hereby apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals
for: 0 A VARIANCE, 0 A SPECIAL USE~ERMIT, 0 AN INTERPRETATION OF THE
___ZO~ING ORDINANCE, l2r"AN:APPEAL As AN AGGRIE'lED PERSON(S) (check proper
. ~ne), i~ connection with premises located at ..................I:!.IE.MI.1:f~~r;a.d<C.....trd.....................,..~__.../f.l1...:.2.9
. . .." _ . . ." ~_ "i... ;" (street &. no.). (lot no.) . (zoning district)
Town of Wappinger, N. Y.. .., ..',:.. '~"" .', ,'~- - .. ,':'"' .. .". :.,;,'. -:-..
-.. .".
J. PROVISION (S) OF. THE. ZONING ORDINAl.....CE APPEALED .".....,.......,..:....:....:............:..,.._,...l!._.......
..:.... ..... ___._... =_ -.,.~~:,,;t;.":~::..::.::.: (indiate
- .'-- '-...-...,..~.--"->'-' '. _.-. ,.-.p --' ....- ~.-.---_:.--::"-'--~....::-.;--_.:p-~.-:-=:-::.~.=-::-:-.:~~::=.~~==:.-:::=:.._~-~~..._.._-:_:.:.:-~;:... .~
.. - .- .:_~'-. .--.:.. ..-, . . .. ...... ,~ .... ..~....-~.' ,
--....----........-.............................................--....................................................-----.....--.----....--.-.................................-.......................-..-................--..--
article, section or subsection and paragraph)
.'~'
2. TYPE OF APPEAL (Complete relevant 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 subsec..
tien .................................! paragraph .......................:...'..... of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the following use
on the above prermses:. '.
~h. ~
.... "'. -I
",.. ,.
c. INTERPRETATION of the Zoning Ordinance is requested because:
..... ,..
"
~~
~.~ '.
d. AGGRIEVED PERSON(S) an appeal is requested beause:
~1f~~.J~ .
. .
,
3. OTHER REMARKS:
. '
............................................................................-...._.........._--_._.......:........-....-......._.........._-~..__..:..--_..-..._......_._~-~. .'
.: ~.
....... .........................................................................................................................................................................................-..-..---.-......--.--..-.-..-...--...-..-......-
(Use extra sheets if necessary) Signaturc.._.._. 7..l..~!:~... ."
· The requin:d plan must accompany the Notice of Appeal. I
Jt/,~.~~ ':~ ~
~
".....-.'
I'
Appeal # 343
January 12th, 1977
The following is the determination of the Zoning Board of
Appeals with regard to Appeal # 343:
The recommendations of the Planning Board of the Town of
Wappinger with respect to' the location of the driveway entrance
was made by relying on the recommendations of the Dutchess County
Department of Public Works and was not arbitrary or capricious.
The hearing was for a Special Use Permit. Approval of the
site plan, under the provisions of the ordinance, was considered
and made simultaneously with the Special Use Permit. The Chairman
of the Planning Board correctly indicated that the hearing was
for a Special Use permit.
Under the provisions of Section 274 of the Town Law, the
Town Board by the Zoning Ordinance may and did delegate to the
Planning Board the advisory power to recommend approval or
disapproval of applications.
Relief as an aggrieved person is hereby denied.