1966-01-13 PH14
A Public Hearing on Wheeler Hill Rezoning Application was held by the Town
Board, Town of Wappinger, on Thursday evening, January •13, 1966, at the
Town Hall, Mill Street, Wappingers Falls, New York
Present:
Joseph H. Fulton - Supervisor
Louis C. Clausen - Councilman
Louis 0. Diehl - Councilman
Absent: None
Others Present:
Vincent S. Francese - Justice of the Peace
William J. Bulger - Justice of the Peace
Elaine H. Snowden - Town Clerk
Joseph D. Quinn- Attorney for the Town
Harold H. Reilly - Attorney for the Town
Joseph E. Fulton - Building Inspector
The meeting was called to odder by Mr. Fulton at 8:05 P.M. Mrs. Snowden
read the Notice of Public Hearing.
Mr. Fumarillo, using a map of the Wheeler Hill area, outlined the meets
and bounds and gave a description of the area under discussion. Area consists
of 600 acres of a low density character, bounded by the Hudson River,
Wappinger Creek, Marlorville Road, Reese peoperty, Deerhill Estates, Tall
Trees, Kanter & Schellenburg property, and Wheeler Hill Road. There are 39
parcels of land; 37 landowners have indicated their desire for this rezoning.
29 owners signed the petition; 8 others didn't want to get involved, but were
not in opposition. Kompass and Milano, owning two parcels consisting of about
25 acres, oppose a rezoning. Thus, 97% of property owners request rezoning.
Mr. Fulton asked if there were any present in favor of the application
for rezoning.
Mr. Aldrich: This is an exceptional and special case. These people
are asking to raise the standard from RD -40 and R-20 to R-40 for a more
onerous zoning than is already imposed. We have had legislation in the State
Legislature for the creation of a Hudson River Valley Scenic and Historic
Corridor, the preservation of the Hudson highlands. All municipal authorities
have been asked to cooperate. Historically, this is a low density area -
larger tracts of land, wooded, hilly. Mr. Aldrich found it interesting to
note that the Planning Board did not find these boundaries natural. The
master plan called for low density in this area. A11 we ask is that the
Town Board preserve what is historically a fact, what exists, if we are to
be consistent with the policy of the State and Federal Government, and the
Town has here the opportunity to protect and preserve the beauty of this area.
Mr. Fulton asked if there were any others present in favor of the
application.
15
Mr. Fumarillo: We believe this area should have been R-40 from the
beginning of zoning. The Planning Board has stated zoning changes in the
Town would be considered in the future including the Wheeler Hill area,
but by the time they do, it might be too late. The area can always be
rezoned lower later, if necessary. Another thing to consider is the one -
mile corridor of scenic easements.
Mr. Aldrich presented a letter from the Novitiate, one of the
boundaries, which was read by Mr. Fulton. It stated that they were in
concurrence with the residents in the Wheeler Hill area. (Letter on file
with Petition)
Mr. Reese:, It would help immeasurably if this beautiful area could
be preserved. We surely hope to keep it that way.
Mr. Forrester: Consider carefully, only three homes have been built
on this total tract of land in the past five years. History has shown
that high density areas become a tax drag on the community. We should
take advantage ,pf low density areas and so rezone it.
Mr. Coutoni: Please consider the principle of self-preservation. We
have banned together, to ask you to aid us, to determine our own future
in our own area.
Mr. Schmalz (Edgehill resident): From the standpoint of economics,
I am strongly in favor of this rezoning.
Mr. Hannen mentioned that many in this area have deed restrictions
anyway, which take precedence over zoning.
Mr. Fumarillo: Is it true that if a group in an area in Town were
to request a sewer, lighting, etc. district, that they would need only
51%? Then the other 49% would be obliged to go along with it. In cases
like that, only 51% can financially burden the others. Some 90% should
be denied their request in this instance then if the application for
rezoning were denied. Would this be fair government?
Mr. Fulton asked if there were any more present who wished to speak
for the application.
There were none.
He then asked if there were any present who wished to speak against
the application.
There were none.
Mr. Bulger: How many residents in the area of proposed change would
not meet the 40,000 square feet requirement?
Li u
Mr. Fumarillo: There are six, with no opposition.
Mr. Forrester stated he was a non -conformist having only 3/4 acre,
but was willing to remain one to do what was right.
Mr. Bulger: Is there any communication from the Dutchess County
Planning Board? I think it is required because we are on the Town boundary
between Wappinger-and the Town of Poughkeepsie.
Mr. Aldrich: We are not within 500 feet of the Town of Poughkeepsie.
We may be within 500 feet of the middle of the Hudson River.
Mr. Ludewig: It would be worth checking into, as Mr. Kelley seems to
think there is room for doubt.
Mr. Vandewinckel: It would be my understanding that there should be a
referral to the County Planning Board to establish boundaries.
Mr. Aldrich: The County Planning Board says it depends on the Town.
Town Clerk read a letter from Deer Park, requesting that their status
remain unchanged. (Letter on file with Petition)
Mr. Quinn: I assume this letter is germain to this application. I
would say that, while it is not the prerogative of counsel to participate in
policy decisions on these matters, I think that this Public Hearing must be
adjourned until some day certain to receive a report- from the Dutchess County
Planning Board with respect to the application for zoning change. I think,
under the provisions of General Municipal Law, the Board has no alternative
but to adjourn the Hearing until the County report is received. The Board
cannot come to a conditional decision. At least part of the boundaries falls
within 500 feet of the boundary of the Town of Poughkeepsie. The report of
the County Planning Board must be received, although you are not bound by
their determination. This opinion of mine has nothing to do with the merits
of this application.
Mr. Fulton: Can we take any action to prevent anyone from taking
advantage of this situation?
Mr. Bulger: Isn't it true that, while this matter is undergoing hearing,
no building permits can be issued?
Mr. Quinn: I don't think so. It would be unwise for any official of
the Town to grant permission for any act which might eventually end up in
violation of this proposed change.
Mr. Diehl: Should this Board recommend anything tonight?
Mr. Quinn: Any recommendation would bear no weight and have no effect.
Mr. Aldrich: Let it appear in the record that no one appeared or spoke
in opposition to the application. Notices were duly read and filed. A
1 7 n ber of people spoke in favor of the application and, as there has
been no report from the Dutchess County Planning Board, adjournmentois
for the sole purpose of awaiting their report.
Mr. Bulger asked Mr. Vandewinckel how long it would take to get a
reply from the County Planning Board and Mr. Vandewinckel stated he would
anticipate 20 to 30 days before a reply would be received.
Mr. Quinn: I suggest the meeting be adjourned until the 20th of
January, with the understanding that it may have to be adjourned again
until February 3rd, or until a further date.
Mr. Aldrich suggested the Hearing be adjourned to the February 3rd
Regular Meeting.
Mr. Bulger: Can any action be taken during the period that this is
under consideration by the Board by anyone who may want to develop or
build?
Mr. Reilly then read from the Zoning Ordinance. In substance, no
Building Permits shall be issued unless they conform to the proposed zoning
change.
Mr. Clausen made,a motion to adjourn the Hearing to February 3, 1966.
Seconded by Mr. Bulger.
Adjourned 9:12 P.M.
Motion Carried Unanimously
Signed:
Town Clerk