Loading...
2005-05-24 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 24, 2005 '-- Agenda Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING DATE: May 24, 2005 TIME: 7:30 PM Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Approve minutes for May 10, 2005. Approve site minutes for May 14, 2005. Public Hearings: Appeal No. 05-7257 A & B Eleanor Meyer _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R -20 Zoning District. -Where a rear yard setback of 40 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 35 feet to allow for a 6 X 8 feet pool deck, thus reQuestine: a variance of 5 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 5 feet to allow for a 8 X 12 feet shed, thus reQuestine: a variance of 5 feet. -Where a rear yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 6 feet to allow for a 8 X 12 feet shed, thus reQuestine: a variance of 4 feet. The property is located at 12 Alpert Drive and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-02-867785 in the Town of Wappinger. '-- Appeal No. 05-7258 Llovd's Parcel- Eh!en Associates- Seeking the following area variance of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. -Where a front yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a front yard setback of 20 feet to allow for a proposed office buildine:, thus reQuestine: a variance of 30 feet. The property is located on Old Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02- 604765 in the Town of Wappinger. Appeal No. 05-7259 A & B Scott & Sari Skinnider _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R -40 Zoning District. _ Where a rear yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 47 feet 5 inches to allow for a 21 X 28 feet deck, thus reQuestine: a variance of 2 feet 7 inches. -Where a rear yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 30 feet 7 inches to allow for a 15 X 24 feet above e:round pool, thus reQuestine: a variance of 19 feet 5 inches. The property is located at 18 Lor Mar Court and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-02-888677 in the Town of Wappinger. "-" 1 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 24, 2005 Discussions: ......... Appeal No. 05-7260 R02er & Natalie Mvrick _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. -Where a side vard setback of 10 feet is reQuired, the applicant is proposing a side vard setback of 5 feet to allow for a 10 X 12 foot shed. thus reQUestin2 a variance of 5 feet. The property is located at 86 Gold Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6358-03-023436 in the Town of Wappinger. Appeal No. 05-7261 Barrv & Maria Olah _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-29F.(1 )(a) of District Regulations of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law. -Which stipulates "no si2n shall proiect above the roof or bevond the side walls of the structure pertinent to the permitted use. The property is located at 1639 Route 376 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6259-03-482346 in the Town of Wappinger. .'-"' Appeal No. 04-7068 Real Holdine Corp. (Gasland)- Seeking the following four area variance's of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. 1. -Seeking an area variance of Article V, Section 240-18 Paragraph F of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. -Where two acres is required, the applicant is proposing .53 acre for continued use of a pre-existine non-conformine lot. thus reQuestine a variance of 1.47 acres. 2. -Seeking an area variance of Article VI, Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. - Where a minimum lot depth of 200 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a lot depth of 153 feet, thus reQuestine a variance of 47 feet for an existing non-conforming lot. 3. -Seeking an area variance of Article VIII, Section 240-52 Paragraph A of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. - Where 1000 feet is required from a residential district, the applicant is proposing 400 feet, thus reQuestine a variance of 600 feet to allow issuance of a Special Use Permit. 4. -Seeking an area variance of Article VIII, Section 240-52 Paragraph E of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. - Where 2.500 feet is required between gasoline filling stations, the applicant is proposing 85 feet, thus reQuestine a variance of 2.415 feet to allow issuance of a Special Use Permit. The property is located on the corner of Old Hopewell Road and Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-610544 in the Town of Wappinger. ........ 2 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 Minutes of May 24,2005 MINUTES '-" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 24, 2005 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Summarized Minutes Members Present: Mr. Fanuele, Mr. Prager, Ms. McEvoy-Riley Mr. Warren, Mr. DellaCorte, Chairman V ice-Chairman Member Member Member Others Present: Mr. Caviglia, Special Counsel Mrs. Lukianoff, Zoning Administrator Mrs. Roberti, Secretary ~ SUMMARY Public Hearin2s: Eleanor Meyer - Variances Granted with condition. Lloyd's Parcel/Elgen Assoc. -Variance Granted. Scott & Sari Skinnider - Variances Granted. Discussions: Roger & Natalie Myrick -Public Hearing set for June 14, 2005. Barry & Maria 01ah -Public Hearing set for June 14, 2005. Real Holding Corp. -Three Variances Granted, One Variance Denied. ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 Minutes of May 24,2005 MINUTES ~~~f1 . ...... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 24, 2005 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Summarized Minutes Members Present: Mr. Fanuele, Mr. Prager, Ms. McEvoy-Riley Mr. Warren, Mr. DellaCorte, Chairman Vice-Chairman Member Member Member Others Present: Mr. Caviglia, Special Counsel Mrs. Lukianoff, Zoning Administrator Mrs. Roberti, Secretary ......... SUMMARY Public Hearines: Eleanor Meyer - Variances Granted with condition. Lloyd's Parcel/Elgen Assoc. -Variance Granted. Scott & Sari Skinnider -Variances Granted. Discussions: Roger & Natalie Myrick -Public Hearing set for June 14, 2005. Barry & Maria Olah -Public Hearing set for June 14, 2005. Real Holding Corp. -Three Variances Granted, One Variance Denied. ...... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ...... Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Page 2 Minutes of May 24, 2005 Motion to approve Minutes for May 10,2005. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve Site Minutes for May 14, 2005. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 05-7257 A & B Eleanor Meyer - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-20 Zoning District. -Where a rear yard setback of 40 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 35 feet to allow for a 6 X 8 feet pool deck. thus reQuestine: a variance of 5 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 5 feet to allow for a 8 X 12 feet shed. thus reQuestine: a variance of 5 feet. -Where a rear yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 6 feet to allow for a 8 X 12 feet shed. thus reQuestine: a variance of 4 feet. The property is located at 12 Alpert Drive and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-02-867785 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: ........ Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Fanuele: Ms. Meyer: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Ms. Meyer: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: ...... Eleanor Meyer Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Swore in the applicant. I want to legalize my shed and deck which is already existing. There was a pool there when I bought the house but it had no deck. I didn't know I needed a permit for a deck when it was constructed. As for the shed I have very un- level property there and if! bring it our farther it will be against the pool. When I did the site visit I noticed you have quite a hill back there and you couldn't really bring it further in. Is that fence back there the property line? No it is actually three feet behind that. A site inspection was done by this board individually. Is there anyone in the audience with a comment or question? Hearing none. Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. Prager: '-- Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: Page 3 Minutes of May 24, 2005 Motion to grant the variance as it won't be detrimental to any nearby properties; it is not undesirable although it is self-created. At this point I don't see an alternative method at this time. We will place a condition that nothing be stored behind the shed. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Aye. Mr. Warren: Aye. Mr. Prager: Aye. Mr. DellaCorte: Aye. Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Appeal No. 05-7258 Lloyd's Parcel- EIl!eD Associates- Seeking the following area variance of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. -Where a front yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a front yard setback of 20 feet to allow for a proposed office buUdinl!. thus reQuestinl! a variance of 30 feet. The property is located on Old Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02- 604765 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: Mr. Prager: ,..... Mrs. Roberti: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Povall: Mr. Fanuele: '-- Bill Povall - Povall Engineering Are all the mailings in order? Yes. Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Swore in the applicant. This is a 1.3 acre parcel north of Greenbaum & Gilhooly's and south of Poughkeepsie Nissan. There is a stream that traverses though the southern side. We have been working with the planning board for about a year now and at their recommendation the building was shifted toward Old Route 9 close to the frontage for a number of reasons. First to minimize any disturbance to the wetland and to increase the buffer. Second the town is thinking of creating a Hamlet District and wants to promote sidewalks and buildings close to the road. So with this being the first project in the area the planning board really wanted to create that atmosphere of a hamlet and so they asked if we could put in sidewalks and it is my understanding that they are following along that same path with the La Fonda Del Sol project as well as the Toyota project. Is there anyone in the audience with a comment? Hearing none. Does anyone on the board have a question? Hearing none. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 Minutes of May 24, 2005 Mr. DellaCorte: Motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Prager: Second the motion. Vote: All present voted aye. '-" Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: I'll motion to grant the variance. I don't believe it will be detrimental to nearby properties or change the character of the neighborhood much. It is substantial at 60% and as a variance goes it is not self-created since the planning board has requested it. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Aye. Mr. Warren: Aye. Mr. Prager: Aye. Mr. DellaCorte: Aye. Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Appeal No. 05-7259 A & B Scott & Sari Skinnider - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. -Where a rear vard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 47 feet 5 inches to allow for a 21 X 28 feet deck, thus reQuestine: a variance of 2 feet 7 inches. -Where a rear yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 30 feet 7 inches to allow for a 15 X 24 feet above e:round pool. thus reQuestine: a variance of 19 feet 5 inches. The property is located at 18 Lor Mar Court and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-02-888677 in the Town of Wappinger. '-" Present: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Roberti: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Mr. Skinnider: Mr. Fanuele: ........ Scott Skinnider Are all the mailings in order? Yes. Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. In 2003 we had an above ground pool installed at our house and I did not know that I needed a permit for it. I placed it where it is because my yard is one that is triangle in shape and to the right of the house is my septic, so the place that it has been put is about the only place it would fit. We did a site visit and there really is not too much space considering the shape ofthe lot. Is there anyone in the audience with a question or comment? Hearing none. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ~ Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Mr. DelIaCorte: Mr. Prager: Roll Call: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: "-' Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Page 5 Minutes of May 24, 2005 Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to grant the variances. It is substantial but it is under 50 % and I don't think it will have any detrimental affects. It is self-created but will not create any undesirable affect on the neighborhood. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Aye. Mr. Warren: Aye. Mr. Prager: Aye. Mr. DellaCorte: Aye. Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Due to a time constraint for our attorney we will take a brief five minute executive session. Motion to go into executive session. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to come out of executive session. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 04-7068 Real Holdine: Corp. (Gasland)- Seeking the following four area variance's of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. 1. -Seeking an area variance of Article V, Section 240-18 Paragraph F of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. -Where two acres is required, the applicant is proposing .53 acre for continued use of a pre-existine: non-conformine: lot. thus reQuestine: a variance of 1.47 acres. 2. -Seeking an area variance of Article VI, Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. - Where a minimum lot depth of 200 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a lot depth of 153 feet, thus reQuestine: a variance of 47 feet for an existing non-conforming lot. 3. -Seeking an area variance of Article VIII, Section 240-52 Paragraph A of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. - Where 1000 feet is required from a residential district, the applicant is proposing 400 feet, thus reQuestine: a variance of 600 feet to allow issuance of a Special Use Permit. """'" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 Minutes of May 24,2005 4. -Seeking an area variance of Article VIII, Section 240-52 Paragraph E of District Regulations in an HB Zoning District. ~ - Where 2.500 feet is required between gasoline filling stations, the applicant is proposing 85 feet, thus requesting: a variance of 2.415 feet to allow issuance of a Special Use Permit. The property is located on the corner of Old Hopewell Road and Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-02-610544 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Prager: Motion to declare a negative Dec. Mr. DellaCorte: Second the motion. Mr. Fanuele: At this time the resolution was read into the record. RESOLUTION At a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York, held at Town hail, 20 Middlebush Road, Wappinger Falls, New York, on the 24th day of May, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. The meeting was called to order by Victor Fanuele, Chairman, and upon roll being called, the following were present: .......... Chairman: Members: Victor Fanuele Howard Prager Douglas Warren Thomas DellaCorte Jennifer McEvoy-Riley Absent: The following resolution was introduced by Mr. Prager by -Mr. DellaCorte and seconded WHEREAS, by application dated September 12, 2000, Gas Land Petroleum Company (Real Holding Corporation) sought four variances concerning property located at Route 9 & Old Hopewell Road; Grid no. 1 9- 6157-02-610544, located in an HB district; and WHEREAS on or about March 9, 2001 the Zoning Board of Appeals was declared the lead agency in this application; and WHEREAS the Board has reviewed the documents submitted by ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 7 Minutes of May 24,2005 the applicant, including the Full environmental Assessment Form dated November 27, 2000 submitted to assist in this review, and having ~ inspected the site; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: 1. The recitations set forth above are incorporated in this Resolution as if fully set forth and adopted herein. 2. This action is an "unlisted action" pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617. 3. No significant adverse impacts are foreseeable as a result of the application. The property is fully developed, although vacant. There is no known endangerment of any species of flora or other life on the site. There is no adjoining stream. The property is on a major highway which has over 35,000 motor vehicles traveling by daily. The site is not used for, nor will it have an impact upon, any recreational or ecological pursuits by the public. The uses of the property for a commercial operation will not affect energy consumption significantly. The location is located in the Highway Business district and congruent with such purposes, and was used extensively in the past for commercial purposes. "-'" 4. The site is not located in nor substantially contiguous to a Critical Environment Area pursuant to the Environmental Conservation Law, Article 8 or 6 NYCRR Part 617. 5. The site is congruent with the Town's existing plans for the district. 6. There is no significant adverse environmental impact discernible, and an Environmental Impact Statement is not be required for this action. The foregoing was put to a vote which resulted as follows: Victor Fanuele Voting Aye. Howard Prager Voting Ave. Douglas Warren Voting AY~. Thomas DellaCorte Voting Ave. Jennifer McEvoy-RileyVoting ~. Mr. Fanuele: At this time the findings of fact were read into the record. FINDINGS: '-" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 Minutes of May 24,2005 1 The Zoning Board of Appeals acted as the "lead agency" for the purpose of conducting the coordinated environmental review of the property as required by the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the Regulations promulgated there under and the Wappinger Environmental Quality Review Law (collectively "SEQRA"), and finds this to be an unlisted action in accordance with SEQRA. ~ 2. By resolution dated May 24, 2005, the ZBA, as lead agency, adopted a Negative Declaration of Significance, thereby determining that the proposed action would not result in significantly adverse effect upon the environment. 3 The property at issue is located in the HB district of the Town of Wappinger on the comer of Route 9 and Old Hopewell Road. 4. The property was purchased by Vincent Cappeletti, apparently a principal of the applicant entity, in 1992. Title was transferred in 1997 to the Real Holding Corporation. 5 At the time that the property was purchased by Mr. Cappeletti, it was a contaminated gasoline service station which had been in operation for years. 6. Mr. Cappeletti discontinued the use of the property as a gasoline station. '-" 7. After clean-up of the site, he apparently inquired or attempted unsuccessfully to interest a drug store (CVS) and a donut shop to locate at the property. His attorney related that fast food sites required at least one acre and had an increased need for water and sewer, all of which are unavailable at the property. 8. There is the possibility that the applicant, assuming that the variances were granted, would need further variances in the future depending upon the final site layout. 9. The property is substandard in size in that it is only .53 acres, and has a lot depth of only 153 feet. 1 O. The property is encumbered by an easement belonging to an adjacent lot. 11. The County of Dutchess opposes the application for the variances because the lot is substandard, questions the use of the parcel to viably house a gasoline service station again with a convenience store, which the applicant contemplates constructing, on such a sized lot. '-"" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 9 Minutes of May 24, 2005 12. In reaching this decision hereinafter, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered the following factors and made the following determinations: '-' a. Will an undesirable change be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to near by properties by grant of the variance? NO: The character of the surrounding properties would not be affected as they are all commercial in nature. b. Can the benefit sought by the applicant be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance? NO: The lot is of such substandard character, that any commercial development on the property will need some type ofvariance(s). While the applicant has stated he seeks to build a gasoline service station and convenience store, even if another commercial use comes to pass, at least three of the variances would be needed. c. Is the area variance substantial? '-" YES: The requested area variances are substantial. With regard to the variance reducing the required 2 acres to .53 acres, a variance of73.5%, such a variation is highly substantial. However, in mitigation, the nature of the area on at least three sides of the parcel do not readily call attention to the deficiency, and the existing gas station/convenience store across the road is itself substandard, being located on only .68 acres. These factors encourage the board to find that this particular variance, standing alone, is not objectionable despite its size. With regard to the variance of 47 feet from the minimum depth lot requirement of 200 feet, this variance is 23.5%, and considering all the circumstances, is not objectionable standing alone. In regard to the foregoing lot size depth variance, the County of Dutchess has objected to the grant of such variance, arguing that not only is the property already undersized, but it is even more so in reality because it is subject to an easement belonging to an adjacent property. However, given the topography of the property upon which this easement rests, it is improbable that the easement can be exercised for any purpose which would impede or affect the operations on the applicant's property. Also, as already mentioned, a neighboring gas station directly across Old Hopewell Road has only a slightly larger and substandard size and does not seem to experience any problems, nor cause a detriment to the surrounding area. Concerning the requirement, under special permit regulations, that the property be located 1 000 feet from a residential area, the applicant seeks a variance of 60% or 600 feet, as only 400 feet is provided. Such is substantial and would normally be denied. Again, however, such is mitigated by the fact that the property at issue is surrounded by commercial properties on all sides. Thus, the benefit to the residential area is not realized by prohibiting such a variance, and such variance, standing alone would be granted. The final variance sought regarding the requisite separation between gasoline filling stations of 2,500 feet under special permit regulations, to only 85 feet, is so extraordinarily substantial as to be overwhelming and effectively a nullification of the '-" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 Minutes of May 24, 2005 ."-" legislation itself imposing the separation if the variance were granted. The variance amounts to 96.6%. The legislation was passed imposing this separation presumably for one or more good reasons to further and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the community and public. This legislation would be eviscerated by such a variance, certainly as applied to this situation in which another gas station is located directly across the road, the specific situation sought to be avoided by the statute. This variance, standing alone, must be rejected. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that the variance is in addition to the other three variances which seek substantial alterations. While we have observed that none of the other three individually or perhaps cumulatively should be rejected, when those are added to the request for the 2,500 foot special permit variance, it becomes even more compelling to deny the application as to that variation. d. Will the proposed variance have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or the district? NO: The variances will not have an adverse effect or impact of this nature. e. Is the alleged difficulty selfcreated? ....... YES : Although the lot in its present dimensions was not created as such by the applicant, after purchase by the applicant, he sought to use the property for other purposes, voluntarily allowing the prior use as a gasoline service station to lapse in order to pursue other commercial purposes. The applicant's business judgment was demonstrated to be erroneous as these turned out to be impracticable, compelling him to now seek the variance concerning use as a gasoline service station. In addition, there was no evidence submitted that he has made any attempt to buy any adjoining property or part of it for the purpose of creating a sufficiently large property to provide for potential commercial uses other than a gasoline service station or to sell the property to an adjoining property owner. CONCLUSION: Each of the first three requested variances alone is not objectionable. The fourth requested variance concerning the 2,500 foot separation is objectionable. The first three variances should be granted in order to allow or encourage use of the property for a commercial purpose in view of not granting the fourth requested variance. DECISION: ........ It is determined that the requested variances for an area variance in the amount of 1 .47 acres from the 2 acres required pursuant to 9240- 1 8 paragraph F is granted; that the area variance in the amount of 47 feet from the minimum lot depth of 200 feet required pursuant to 9240-37, schedule of dimensional regulations, is granted; that the area variance in the amount of600 feet from the 1000 feet separation from a residential district required under special permit regulations pursuant to 9240-52 paragraph A, is granted; and the area variance in the amount of 2,415 feet from the 2,500 feet separation from Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 11 Minutes of May 24, 2005 another gasoline filling station required under special permit regulations pursuant to 9240-52 paragraph E, is denied. "'-- C) The question of the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly put to a vote on roll call, which resulted in the following: Victor Fanuele Howard Prager Douglas Warren Thomas DellaCorte Jennifer McEvoy-Riley Variance # 1 Mr. Prager: "-' Mr. Fanuele: Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: Variance #2 Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: Variance # 3 '-'" V oting: Aye. Voting Aye Voting Aye. Voting Aye for Variance # 1,2 & 3 Nay for Variance # 4 Voting Aye. Variance of a substandard lot. I think in and of itself we looked at the other lots in the area and there are a number of sub-sized lots in the area like 7/11 and the one next to this. I make a motion to grant this area variance for .53 acres where 2 acres is required. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Mr. Warren: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanue1e: Variance for lot deoth. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Motion to grant the variance for 47 feet where 200 feet is required. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Mr. Warren: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanue1e: Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Variance to be 1000 feet from a residential district. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. Fanuele: ''-'' Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Roll Call: Variance #4 Mr. Warren: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Roll Call: '........ Mr. Prager: Mr. Cappelletti: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Cappelletti: Mr. DellaCorte: Page 12 Minutes of May 24,2005 This particular parcel is surrounded by other commercial properties. This is substantial but I make a motion to grant this variance of 600 feet where 1000 feet is required since it is surrounded by commercial parcels. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Mr. Warren: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Variance of 2500 feet between I!asoline tillinl! stations. I just think that it is just so large at 97 % that we would be changing the zoning law and if that is the case I believe there was a reason when this was written to have 2500 feet between gas stations and I am not about to start changing laws. This is just a little too large for my feelings so I make a motion that we deny this variance. Second the motion. Ms. McEnoy-Riley: Mr. Warren: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Fanuele: Aye. Aye. Aye. Nay. I think it should be granted. Aye. The Town Board would have to do something. The Town Board sent us here for relief. They didn't want to change the law and it's not this one they are trying to stop but they didn't want to open the door to other gas stations. You will need to go back to the Town Board. How can they correct this without taking out the law completely? We really can't argue this anymore since the ZBA has made their decision. Appeal No. 05-7260 Roeer & Natalie Mvrick _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. ~ Page 13 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 24,2005 -Where a side yard setback of 10 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 5 feet to allow for a 10 X 12 foot shed. thus reauestine: a variance of 5 feet. The property is located at 86 Gold Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6358-03-023436 in the Town of Wappinger. ., Present: Mr. Myrick: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Warren: Mr. Myrick; Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Myrick: Mr. Prager: Mr. Myrick: ........ Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Prager: Mr. Warren: Vote: Roger Myrick 33 years ago I built a shed 5 feet from the property line and then replaced it once and now I am selling my house. On the east side my neighbor has a great view of the mountains and the center of my yard has my septic fields. My property slopes down on the sides so I built it up with cement. We will come out and do a site visit. Is this securely mounted to the cement? Yes it is. The builder of your home, Reiger Homes, told you that he thought that location for the shed is fine? Yes he did. When did you replace it? I put it in 33 years ago and replaced it two years ago. We will do a site inspection on June 4th and your public hearing will be June 14th, 2005. I motion that the ZBA be Lead Agency. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 05-7261 Barrv & Maria Olah _ Seeking an area variance of Section 240-29F.(l)(a) of District Regulations of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Law. -Which stipulates "no sie:n shall proiect above the roof or beyond the side walls of the structure pertinent to the permitted use. The property is located at 1639 Route 376 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6259-03-482346 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Olah: '-" Mr. & Mrs. Olah This is the Old Warnock House correct? Yes. Page 14 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Mr. DellaCorte: '" Mr. Prager: Mr. Olah: Mr. Prager: Mr. Olah: Mr. Warren: Mr. Olah: Mrs. Lukianoff: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Lukianoff: Mr. Olah: ...... Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Olah: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Lukianoff: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Roberti: '--" Minutes of May 24,2005 I like the Lillianna sign a lot but not the Runaway Deli sign. Are you going to keep them about the same? Yes. Do you think when you come back you can have a picture of it? What are plans are is to get the restaurant up and running and then within 6 months get the pizza and deli up and running. It's a big building and we would like to maximize it. Will this be seven days a week? Yes. If the signs were put on the walls they would be hidden. Is the square footage ok? Yes that was already checked and it was just the location of the signs that were the problem. We will also be putting awnings up and will generally be dressing up the site. We will drive by there and take a look at the site and your public hearing will be on the 14th of June. Thank you. What is this memo from Tania? It basically tells you when the code started to add the extra parameters for the sq. footage for accessory buildings. I was surprised that it was fairly recently. When looking at the sq. ft. of pools and sheds that were put in the yards in the eighties that it was not a mistake but rather there really were no criteria for that location and now there are. What about the Stear Subdivision? Marco has all the paperwork and he will be looking into it. I have also sent a letter to Graham as requested. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 Minutes of May 24,2005 Mr. Fanuele: Mr. Prager: Vote: Motion to adjourn. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Meeting ended at 8:30 PM Respectfully Submitted, AJ~-/UlO~' B~~berti, Secretary Secretary - Zoning Board of Appeals ~ ........