Loading...
2006-02-14 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS February 14, 2006 .,-, Agenda Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING DATE: February 14, 2006 TIME: 7:30 PM Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Approve minutes for October 25, 2005. Approve minutes for January 10, 2006. Approve minutes for January 24, 2006. Approve site minutes for January 28, 2006. Adjourned Public Hearing: '-' Appeal No. 05-7289-7290-7291-7292-7293 228 Myers Corners, LLC - Seeking an Interpretation of the Zoning Administrator's letter of determination dated December 6,2005 for the currently proposed uses ofthe NB portion of the site. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a side yard setback of 20 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 13.6 feet to allow for an existin2 metal shed. thus reQUestin2 a variance of 6.4 feet. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 & 240-67 A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a lot size of 3 acres is required for motor vehicle use in buildin2 # 1, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reQUestin2 a combined variance of 3.4 acres. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-70. A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a lot size of 2 acres is required for a proposed use in buildin2 # 3, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reQUestin2 a combined variance of 3.4 acres. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-70. A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. - Where a lot size of 2 acres is required for the proposed use in buildin2 # 2, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reQUestin2 a combined variance of 3.4 acres. The property is located at 228 Myers Corners Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-02- 702520 in the Town of Wappinger. Public Hearings: Appeal No. 06-7294 Ralph & Dorothy Giammarino- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-53B (4) of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. -Where the code states: Maximum size. An accessory apartment shall be subordinate in area to the principal dwelling. The accessory apartment shall not exceed 35 % of the 2ross floor area of said principal dwelling, and in no event shall exceed 1,000 square feet of gross floor and you provide a 2ross floor area of 50 %. The property is located at 41 Brothers Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-835280 in the Town of Wappinger. ....... ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS February 14, 2006 ....... Discussions: Appeal No. 06-7296 Robert Mutsheler -Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. - Where the code states...in no case shall Accessorv Structures be permitted in the front yard the applicant requests a variance for a shed in the front yard in the size of 12 X 24 feet. The property is located at 6 Cauda Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-03- 265178 in the Town of Wappinger. ......... Appeal No. 06-7297 Mr. & Mrs. Surjit Sineh- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40/S0 Zoning District. - Where a rear yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 35 feet to allow for a 20 X 25 foot 2-storv addition. thus reQuestine a variance of 15 feet. - Where a side yard setback of 25 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 22 feet to allow for a 20 X 25 foot 2-storv addition. thus reQuestine a variance of 3 feet. The property is located at 2005 Route 9D and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-02- 673816 in the Town of Wappinger. "- 2 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 1 Minutes of February 14, 2006 f\1!NUTES /\pr:>ROVED MINUTES f . ....., c:' " : .. ...~. .:. "/'11'''' /tJ~.t~1 '-'" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals February 14, 2006 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Summarized Minutes Members Present: Mr. Prager, Vice-Chairman Ms. McEvoy-Riley Member Mr. DellaCorte, Member Members Absent: Mr. Warren, Mr. Fanuele, Member Chairman Others Present: Mr. Caviglia, Mrs. Lukianoff, Mrs. Roberti, Special Counsel Zoning Administrator Secretary "- SUMMARY Adiourned Public Hearin2: 228 Myers Comers Road -Adjourned to February 28, 2006 Public Hearin2: Ralph Giammarino -Variance granted. Discussions: Robert Mutsheler -Public Hearing on February 28, 2006 Mr. & Mrs. Surjit Singh -Public Hearing on February 28, 2006 '- Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ........ Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: ........ Page 2 Minutes of February 14, 2006 Motion to approve the Minutes for October 25, 2005. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve the Minutes for January 10, 2006 as amended. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve the Minutes for January 24, 2006. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to approve the Site Minutes for January 28, 2006. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 05-7289-7290-7291-7292-7293 228 Mvers Corners. LLC - Seeking an Interpretation of the Zoning Administrator's letter of determination dated December 6,2005 for the currently proposed uses of the NB portion of the site. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a side vard setback of 20 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side vard setback of 13.6 feet to allow for an existine metal shed. thus reQuestine a variance of 6.4 feet. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 & 240-67 A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a lot size of 3 acres is required for motor vehicle use in buildine # 1, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres. thus reQuestine a combined variance of 3.4 acres. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-70. A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a lot size of 2 acres is required for a proposed use in buildine # 3, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres. thus reQuestine a combined variance of 3.4 acres. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-70. A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. -Where a lot size of 2 acres is required for the proposed use in buildine # 2, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres. thus reQuestine a combined variance of 3.4 acres. The property is located at 228 Mvers Corners Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-02- 702520 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: '- Don Walsh Peter Karis - Project Manager - Insight Design Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ......... Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 5 '-" 7 10 13 14 Page 3 Minutes of February 14, 2006 Motion to open the adjourned public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. BELOW IS THE MINUTES FROM J & L REPORTING SERVICE Mr. Prager: MR. WALSH: MR. PRAGER: MR. WALSH: Before we begin, I would like to say, I must recluse myself from this public hearing due to a conflict of interest. I'm going to have to, unfortunately, turn it over to my cohorts here. I'll be out of it. If I can ask for a second? If you recuse yourself we only have two board members. Yes, that's correct. In other words, we could not make any type of a decision to grant or deny tonight or give an interpretation until we get a full board. I can't object to that. MR. PRAGER: Unfortunately, it didn't work out. One person is sick and like I said _ MR. WALSH: Obviously if you knew the conflict I'd be prepared to waive it. MR. PRAGER: I happen to be very personal friends with Mr. Parsons. MR. WALSH: No problem with you saying that on the record. On the other hand, I have never had any objection to you acting fairly. MR. PRAGER: I feel ethically probably it would be better if I didn't. MR. WALSH: No issue on that. I put this on here with the Board's permission so we can. MS. McEVOY-RILEY: Make a motion to open the meeting. MR. DELLACORTE: Second. MR. PRAGER: Motion made and 3 seconded to open the public hearing. 4 MR. WALSH: If you recall the 5 last meeting that we had here was, 6 you had moved to continue the public 7 hearing because you wanted an 8 opportunity to review the transcript. 9 I have obviously received the '-" ....... ....... ........ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. PRAGER: Mr. Walsh: Page 4 Minutes of February 14, 2006 transcript, I reviewed it. I don't know if any member of the board received theirs. That was the main reason it was put over. If the board has accepted and seen it and they may have more questions for us off that, I'm happy to answer them. In the interest of brevity, I know I cannot get a vote in terms of what we're doing tonight. I'd like to give the board and Counsel and any member of the public, two different letters I'd like put into the record itself. The first is a letter which Counsel you may have seen it, the whole thing from Jeff faxed up to the office in the town, I'm giving you that to be presented into the record. It's regarding the weight of evidence on substantiated guess work. It's for the Board's review and determination. ~ Mr. Schumae is the Town Attorney in Putnam Valley and he represents us for insight. We had a long term working together in this general area. The second letter is a synopsis of each of the five requests that are our appeals that are in front of you tonight. I'd like to hand those out. First I'm going to briefly comment on those and move on. I'll pass that to Counsel. This is -Barbara tells me you all have that in front of you. The second is my own and, by the way, the Schumae letter is dated February 8. That was forwarded to the town earlier. The second one is my own dated February 13, which is a synopsis of what I'm doing tonight. We don't have that one. That's right. Obviously this was written, the appeals in themselves are slightly different in each respect, especially if you had the opportunity to review the transcript, the first appeal deals with strictly the interpretation of the statute. I'm going to add something to that as we look at that. The Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals .......... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .......... 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ....... Page 5 Minutes of February 14, 2006 statute itself, if you remember, the reason the motorcycle shop came in originally to the town was to get a license. They were given an interpretation at that time that they were. they needed a special use permit within the NB Zone, as a result of that, in addition to site plan issues, since none of the owners of the property ever bothered to file a site plan or do anything in compliance with the town in the 1940's, it's necessary to do that. That got us to the Planning Board and over to this Board. The interpretation itself actually is two different issues. We stressed in €he letter one issue, which was that your own code in two different sections, both under repair garages and under motor vehicle sales, deals with the issue of having a smaller facility. That's what is commented on in here. What I'd like to submit to the board for it's eventual decision and review on is a different factor. The way the statute is written in both sections 240-67, that is the section that deals strictly with the motor vehicle sales establishment and in 240-70, which deals with repair garages. The motorcycle, proposed motor vehicle facility in building #2 fell into both of these, and according to the administrator they checked off both those things, selling motorcycles and they would be repairing motorcycles on the premises. As a result of that, we did a fairly careful reading and in each case those statutes were amended by Town Law. This may be something, especially if it's impossible to make a decision tonight Counsel has a chance to get the minutes from that and looked at. The Town Law was changed September 24th, 2001. It was changed by Local Law No.5 2001. What that said, basically notwithstanding the requirements to the contrary, the sale of small motor vehicles, and specifically says less than fifteen hundred pounds of gross weight, including, such as go-carts, jet skis Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals .......... 21 22 23 24 25 .......... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 '-' Page 6 Minutes of February 14, 2006 and motorcycles, shall be permitted and regulated as a retail use, provided there's no outdoor storage, the floor area is less than five thousand square feet. The use meets all the requirements of this section. The requirements of the section are easy to look at, no sleeping quarters in the building, no automobile parts stored outside. There is no -they do have overhead garage doors, the required parking space. They don't have the minimum lot acreage The section says it doesn't matter about that. How do we define retail use? Your code defines it separately. The retail use is a principle permitted use in the NB Zone, no requirement to be here, no special use permit beyond that fact. I would like that seriously looked at. No other reason under the sun they would have passed an amendment to that law. I've been involved in that process for more than thirty years. I was not involved in this one. Why the town passed this, we do have a little time here, we'll send Counsel who can meet with Counsel and Town Counsel and perhaps an opponent's Counsel and look at that very fairly. That may make this easy in that sense. That's the interpretation section. The retail use is a principle permitted use in this zone. That's what the statute says. In addition to that, the other four sections set forth right under that one, the side yard, that's an appeal 05-7290, that deals with the storage shed. The storage shed, according to the Town records, has been here more than twenty-five years. Mr. Roberts discussed that at length. I attached Mr. Roberts' letter that was given to us in a Freedom of Information Act here. They were deciding what to do with Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ....... 22 23 24 25 ...... 4 .7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 .......... Page 7 Minutes of February 14, 2006 the property back in '01. Basically he said that's consistent with the prior uses. We note in there, this lS Peter Karas from the engineering firm who did the landscape architecture service as a screen function and provides an easy pick up point for waste. It's something that could be taken down without a lot of effort. It stores the stuff and a lot of -tuff is still comlng out of those premises. There's debris under the soil buried there for years. Mr. Borak has a gentleman on the site and he will be there for seven more months. In addition to that, there is no objection, if you read the minutes, there is no objection to the storage shed. It's respectfully suggested that storage shed be permitted In its place. The third appeal deals use of building #1 for motor sales, among other uses. A the Town Attorney consistent prior approvals, he's opined Planning Board this is a grandfathered use. Perhaps you can verify that to make sure everybody is fully aware of what he said on that. fully aware of what he already said on that. When I asked why we had to do that, they said they wanted the site to be completely cleaned up, In the sense that every use would be reflected in the site plan. This lS the Steven's business still there and selling cars forever. In addition to that, the one thing we noted In there they actually only used point SlX acres in the front. To hold them to a three acre standard when they never had it we thought would not be correct. We asked that as an unopposed appeal that be granted. The fourth one permits the two acre requirement in building #3 and that's self explanatory, there's been no objection. No one has objected and having the continued usage of that building, which lS a motor vehicle repair shop, always has been. That's Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 25 """" 3 4 MR. CA VIGLIA: ~ MR. WALSH: """" 8 MR. CAVIGLIA: 9 10 MR. WALSH: 11 MR. CAVIGLIA: 12 13 MR. WALSH: 14 15 MR. CAVIGLIA: 16 17 18 MR. WALSH: 19 20 21 22 MR. PRAGER: 23 24 25 2 MR. SIMEONE: 3 4 5 6 8 "'-- Page 8 Minutes of February 14, 2006 the only thing it's set up for, that be allowed to be continued on the assumption his release will reflect he's not allowed to make noise on the premises beyond the Town Code, no outside storage beyond the screened side yard, he's not allowed any outside of any type. Basically confined to the building itself. Finally, the last appeal lone about the motorcycle sales facility, and that talks about the lease restrictions in there feel respectfully that the way that that should be dealt with is the interpretation angle that's very clear this is a permitted retail use. I do acknowledge it may have to be looked at carefully by counsel. With that in mind, I turn this over to the public or the board, if you have any questions on what was presented earlier. I have Peter present and Peter can comment to you on the what we have talked about in terms of the fencing and other things. So your interpretation request deals specifically with 240-70 paragraph I. Two sections. 240-70 I refers to 240-67. That's correct. That's the issue you're looking at? Yes. That law change in 9/24/01. I want to make sure you framed that issue so the board understands. They changed both sections simultaneously. They said specifically motorcycles and jet skis. Anybody else in the audience that would like to speak for or against this appeal? Anybody have anything else? Frank Simeone here on behalf of William Parsons. will be very brief. You have other matters on and much to be done with this application. I'd like to state I would like to rely on the prior record Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals '-' 9 11 12 13 21 ~ 25 2 3 4 5 6 7- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 3 4 5 .6 7 8 9 ~ MR. PRAGER: MR. SIMEONE: Page 9 Minutes of February 14, 2006 previously stated in this matter. You have the minutes? Yes. I'd like to note with respect to the items just raised by Mr. Walsh, obviously the opponent would like to have an opportunity to respond, and we'll need to research the issues and take a look at them. Lastly, two other last things. First of all, just reviewing the minutes from the last session, I saw the point being made there. The applicant proposes that the nOlse issue will be addressed privately. In other words, as a term in the lease. I think what we're asking from this board, if necessary, set forth requirements or conditions in any special use permits, so it's clear there are public interests involved, not just the private interest between the contracting parties and the lessee with respect to what requirements there are so the public can rely on the conditions you would set, if it's in your discretion to grant the variances. Lastly, I would point out again, I don't believe this has been rebutted, it is the applicant's burden to show the grandfathering conforming use has been established. The submissions from your zoning administrator and in the file before you is directly to the contrary. I don't believe it's shown yet. There's been a discontinuance of the prior use with respect to building #2, which is the motorcycle shop, and just to sum up, I'll point out again, which was a point made earlier, the variances being sought here are gross, nothing small about this, in the end you'll see what I think I called incremental at the last hearing bit by bit by bit. This is the beginning of an application to completely change the character and Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ....... ......... MR. PRAGER: MR. BUREK: MR. BUREK: Page 10 Minutes of February 14,2006 use and I believe consistent with your obligations under your code they are to be considered and to be determined, and if with respect to the rights of the applicant here equally with the rights of the existing neighborhood, I don't believe that granting such gross variances, as are requested in this case, would be consistent with the character of the community, which I think is your charge. Yes, sir. Come to the front here and state your name, please, for the record. Thomas Burek. I'm the majority shareholder of 228 Myers Corners, LLC, which owns the property. A few years back r had foreclosed on this property and r had purchased it. r then expended over one hundred thousand dollars of cleaning up, and I'm sure all of you have seen the site pictures. I've done a yoman's job of cleaning the property up. That took me a period of time. r got a couple of new tenants and they had gone to your department to get a permit to do their mechanical work. r guess in this area you need to do some type of auto repair, you need to get the Town to sign off so they can get their license from the State. At that point something seriously went wrong Ithinkwithyourprocess. Looking at the paperwork, this was a mechanical auto for the last fifty, sixty years. It indicates I believe in the records what the property is zoned for. The prior two owners for the last sixty years apparently never filed a map, so your Town had asked us to comply so that we shouldn't lease it yet, but comply with the maps. You had some requests. We have conformed and we're now asking for your help so that we can put some tenants in here. No new building, no old building, but just existing buildings. We have done a serious job of cleaning it up. I am now in the hole for over three hundred fifty thousand dollars waiting for both this board and the other board in the last two years to find in either direction. The gentleman who spoke Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ........ 3 7 8. MR. PRAGER: 14 15 MS. McEVOY-RILEY: MR. WALSH: MS. McEVOY-RILEY: ........ MR. WALSH: 3 4 MS. McEVOY-RILEY: 5 6 MR. WALSH: 8 9 10 11 MS. McEVOY-RILEY: 13 14 15 MR. SCHWARTZ: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ....... Page 11 Minutes of February 14, 2006 prior I don't think has taken any value for what we did to the property and the prior owners not being responsible for the clean up. All of the tires, refuse, I have over eighty thousand dollars of dump fee costs to clean up that property. I would hope that at the next meeting we could have a vote up or down so that I can get on and decide either way how to handle the problem. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anybody else in the audience that would like to speak for or against the appeal? Let the record show there is no one else that wants to speak for or against the appeal. I'll take questions from the board. Mr. Walsh, what's the square foot of that building? Which one? The one with the motorcycles. Forty-five hundred square feet. That's supposed to be motorcycle sales and repairs? That was what the application was filed for. That doesn't mean the board can say it can be used for certain things. Ask the tenant. What percentage do you imagine that will be sales and repairs? Hard to say. We haven't conducted business there to determine that at this point. I really couldn't give a justified number to that. I would assume that the repair end would be possibly higher than the sales end, but that's that's hard to say without having an established business someplace else to give you those facts. 25 Ms. McEVOY-RILEY: Will you be selling anything else; motorcycle accessories like helmets? MR. SCHWARTZ: We have the accessories that go with the motorcycles, of course. No wave runners? Mr. Schwartz, come up because of the recorder. Raise your right hand. (Whereupon Mr. Schwartz was sworn in by Mr. Prager.) No wave runners? No. Do you envision in your head what you would like to see for percentages of Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ........ MR. DELLACORTE: MR. PRAGER: 11 12 13 MR. DELLACORTE: MR. SCHWARTZ: MR. DELLACORTE: ........ MR. SCHWARTZ: 22 23 24 25 2 3 MR. WALSH: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MR. SCHWARTZ: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 MR. DELLACORTE: 21 2 MR. SCHWARTZ: 23 24 MR. WALSH: 25 "- Page 12 Minutes of February 14, 2006 repair versus - I'd probably like to see less repairs and more sales. You know, it's hard to say. I don't know what the area lS gOlng to bring. I have nothing to give you for an example. Maybe provide that for the next meeting, since there's a similar facility on Route 6 right dead center in the Town of Carmel, maybe we can get that from them. Similar, when I went by, it's almost identical in square footage and set up, at least I can get an idea. You need to understand what we do. I'm not in the business of working on Japanese bikes and stuff. We do what you see on FV, these are high priced motorcycles. That's where we're at. The target is at work on nJ don't want to work on the imports. It's all American products. Fabrication would be a word you would use? Not really. We basically take a bike and jazz it up. Detailing kind of thing? Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ....... MR. SCHWARTZ: 3 4 5 MR. WALSH: 8 MS. McEVOY-RILEY: MR. PRAGER: MR. DELLACORTE: 14 ....... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Ms. McEVOY-RILEY: 16 MR. PRAGER: MR. DELLACORTE: MR. PRAGER: 21 22 23 24 25 1 ......... Page 13 Minutes of February 14,2006 Add some chrome to it and whatever else. I wish I can give you more details, as I have nothing to give you as a fact. I will try to have that for the record by the next meeting. I wasn't aware it's exactly the same. Thank you. Anything else? I would like to ask Barbara that we place into the record a few things. Make sure they're, number one, is the zoning ZBA minutes from 1/10/06, number two is the letter from the ZBA administrator Tanya dated 12/6/05, minutes of November 3, minutes from the J&L Reporting Service, number four, the letter from the Director of Code Enforcement, George Kolb, Junior dated 9/1/05 to Richard Cantor, Esquire; number five, letter from Gerald Tawilliger and Mike Schwartz to the Zoning Administrator, Town of Wappingers dated 7/29/05. Number six, the letter from John and Wesley Vilano to the Town of Wappingers, Town Board Planning Board and Zoning Board dated 1/3/06. The last one is a survey map from Insight Engineering and Surveying and Landscape Architecture, PC, project number 04217.100 for al project 228Myers Corners, LLC dated 10/27/05. That's it. Thank you. Make a motion we adjourn this public hearing. Motion's been made to adjourn the public Hearing. Second. All in favor? It's gOlng to depend on my feeling, number one, we don't know Mr. Fanuele, when he's going to be coming out of the hospital. The other thing, we have no idea about Mr. Warren, we haven't been in Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 Minutes of February 14, 2006 3 4 ......... MR. WALSH: 6 7 8 MR. PRAGER: 10 12 1 contact with him to find out if he's going to be at the next meeting. I respectfully ask to schedule for the 28th, and Barbara can deal with that issue and let us know whether it's on or not. We'll adjourn to the 28th. Motion made and seconded to adjourn the public hearing until February 28th. All in favor? Opposed. So carried. Appeal No. 06-7294 Ralph & Dorothy Giammarino- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-53B (4) of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. -Where the code states: Maximum size. An accessory apartment shall be subordinate in area to the principal dwelling. The accessory apartment shall not exceed 35 % of the eross floor area of said principal dwelling, and in no event shall exceed 1,000 square feet of gross floor and you provide a eross floor area of 50 %. The property is located at 41 Brothers Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-835280 in the Town of Wappinger. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. '-" Mr. Prager: Are the mailings in order? Mrs. Roberti: Yes they are. Mr. Prager: Swore in the applicant. Mr. Giammarino: I built this home in 1960 and my daughter Laura is a single mom and she was spending an awful lot of money to live elsewhere. I decided to put an apartment up for her and my grandchildren in 1993. We had a fire and we are making improvements now. We have followed all the engineering and all the instructions from the building inspector. Mr. Prager: How big is the apartment? Mr. Giammarino: 900 sf approximately. Mr. Prager: Is there anyone in the audience with a comment? Ms. Darbonne: Mary Darbonne, 45 Sherwood Hgts. I oppose because everywhere around there is one family dwellings and if they are doing an apartment it would be considered a two-family home. "-'" Mr. Prager: Swore in Ms. Darbonne. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 Minutes of February 14, 2006 '--' Ms. Darbonne: I just moved in on the 7th so I just see all this construction and would like more information. Mr. Giammarino: This would just be an accessory apartment for my daughter and her family. Mrs. Lukianoff: Explained what an accessory apartment is and all the requirements Jor one. Ms. Darbonne: Ok then that would be fine, then I do not object at all. Mr. Prager: Anyone else in the audience? Hearing none. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: Motion to grant the variance. This will not cause an undesirable change in the neighborhood, there are no other feasible way to seek this variance, no adverse change to the neighborhood and it is self-created. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Prager: Aye. Aye. Aye. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: '--' Appeal No. 06-7296 Robert Mutsheler -Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40 Zoning District. -Where the code states...in no case shall Accessorv Structures be permitted in the front yard the applicant requests a variance for a shed in the front yard in the size of 12 X 24 feet. The property is located at 6 Cauda Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6157-03-265178 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Mutsheler: I applied for a shed last year and spoke with Tania and there was a misunderstanding on the location. My house faces Cauda Lane with Ketchamtown Road on my side. The shed came and I put the shed where I thought we had agreed on. Cauda Lane is a private road. I put the shed in place before I received the denial letter and it is my fault for letting this go for over one year. Mr. Prager: This is a good size shed. What is it made of? Mr. Mutsheler: Tl-Il, wood and shingles and no foundation. It can be moved but not easily. Mr. Prager: How far do you feel it is in front of the house? '"" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 Minutes of February 14, 2006 ........ Mrs. Lukianoff: This is like a comer lot. Cauda is a paper road and the definition is off of a town road so Ketchamtown Road becomes the front yard. Mr. Mutsheler: This is my fault but I just looked at my survey this last week with my neighbor and my property is not the comer lot and it may be too late to discuss this but. . .. Mrs. Lukianoff: So this is not correct. Mr. Prager: When did you purchase the house? Mr. Mutsheler: Four years ago and I have a survey. Mr. Prager: Bring that up to us please. The board and Mr. Mutsheler discussed the survey up at the dais. Mr. Prager: Please make seven copies of this and bring them into Barbara for the next meeting. We will schedule your site visit for February 18,2006 and your public hearing will be on February 28,2006. Mr. Mutsheler: Thank you. ........ Appeal No. 06-7297 Mr. & Mrs. Suriit Sin2h- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-40/80 Zoning District. -Where a rear yard setback of 50 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 35 feet to allow for a 20 X 25 foot 2-storv addition. thus reQUestin2 a variance of 15 feet. -Where a side yard setback of 25 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 22 feet to allow for a 20 X 25 foot 2-storv addition. thus requesting: a variance of 3 feet. The property is located at 2005 Route 9D and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-02-673816 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Singh: We have a very small house with two bedrooms and my wife's parents are coming to live with us and we are looking to put a two-story addition onto the house. It would be a bedroom and family room and we are only looking for a 3 foot variance. Mr. Prager: How long are you there? Mr. Singh: About 16 years and it is a 50 year old house. Mr. Prager: Your front faces 9D? ......... Mr. Singh: Yes. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals ....... Mr. Prager: Mr. Singh: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. Prager: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Meeting ended at 8:35 PM ....... --... Page 17 Minutes of February 14, 2006 What is the size of the house now without the addition? Very small but I never measured it. I have a survey though. In the file it says it is 1,022 sf. Ok and that's on one acre ofland. We will set your site visit for February 18, 2006 and your public hearing will be on February 28, 2006. Motion to adjourn. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Respectfully SUb'~it~, /f/ 1~{)lI-M' ;, , 'J' B r ara Roberti, Secretary ISecretary - Zoning Board of Appeals