Loading...
2006-05-23 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 23, 2006 ...... Agenda Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals MEETING DATE: May 23,2006 TIME: 7:30 PM Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY Approve site minutes for May 20, 2006. Executive Session Adjourned Public Hearing: Appeal No. 06-7306 John & Pat Ronl!o- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-20 Zoning District. - Where a side yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposinl! a side yard setback of 2 feet, to allow for a lOX 20 foot shed, thus reQuestinl! a variance of 8 feet. The property is located at 9 Namoth Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-960002 in the Town of Wappinger. Public Hearing: ~ Appeal No. 06-7307 Joe Clement Inc.- 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 proposinl! a rear yard setback of 21.6 feet, to allow for a 24 X 32 foot garage, thus reQuestinl! a variance of 18.4 feet. The property is located at 54 Easter Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-01-259729 in the Town of Wappinger. Appeal No. 06-7313 Susan & Max Dao- 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 proposinl! a rear yard setback of 15 feet, to allow for an above ground poo~ thus reQuestinl! a variance of 25 feet. The property is located at 2 Dwyer Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-02-790510 in the Town of Wappinger. Discussions: ....... Appeal No. 05-7289-7290-7291-7292 228 Myers Corners, LLC - Seeking an Interpretation ofthe 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 yard setback of 20 feet is required, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 13.6 feet to allow for an existinl! metal shed, thus reQuestinl! 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 buildinl! # 1, the applicant is proposing! total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reQuestinl! a combined variance of 3.4 acres. - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-70. A of District Regulations in an NB Zoning District. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS May 23, 2006 .... -Where a lot size of2 acres is reQuired for a proposed use in buildinl! # 3, the applicant is proposing.!!, total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reQuestinl! 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. Closed the public hearing on April 25, 2006. Expires on June 26, 2006. EAF delivered by May 4, 2006. .... "" 2 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals MINUTES ....... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals May 23, 2006 Summarized Minutes Members Present: Mr. Prager, Mr. DellaCorte, Ms. McEvoy-Riley Member Absent: Mr. Fanuele, Mr. Warren, Others Present: '-" Mr. Caviglia, Mr. Stolman, Mr. A. Roberts, Mrs. Lukianoff, Mrs. Roberti, Page 1 Minutes of May 23,2006 Town Hall 20 Middlebush Road Wappinger Falls, NY V ice-Chairman Member Member Chairman Member Special Counsel Town Planner Town Attorney Zoning Administrator Secretary SUMMARY Adiourned Public Hearin2: John & Pat Rongo Public Hearin2: Joe Clement, Inc. Susan & Max Dao 228 Myer Comers Road Discussions: Degnan Site Plan ~ Variance Granted. Variance Granted. Variance Granted. Public Hearing on June 27, 2006 for the EAF only. Consented to a undated extension by Jon Adams. , Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 Minutes of May 23,2006 '-" Mr. DellaCorte: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Vote: Motion to approve the Site Minutes for May 20, 2006. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Appeal No. 05-7289-7290-7291-7292 228 Myers 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 yard setback of 20 feet is reauired, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 13.6 feet to allow for an existine: metal shed, thus reauestine: 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 reauired for motor vehicle use in buildine: # 1, the applicant is proposing a total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reauestine: 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 reauired for a proposed use in buildine: # 3, the applicant is proposing ~ total lot size of 3.6 acres, thus reauestine: 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 III the Town of Wappinger. Closed tlte public Itearing on April 25, 2006. Expires on June 26, 2006. EAF delivered by May 4, 2006. 2 MR. PRAGER: On the end of the "- 3 agenda we have a discussion on a 4 closed public hearing. We have a 5 closed public hearing appeal 6 05-7289-7290 228 Myers Comers Road. 7 I'd like to turn it over to Mr. 8 Dellacorte. He's going to have to 9 speak about 228 Myers Comers Road 10 mainly because I have recused myself 11 from the meeting. 12 MR. DELLACORTE: He's recused 13 himself. We'll not be taking any 14 action on 228 tonight. The reason 15 is, we do not have a quorum. One of ....... 16 our members had a family emergency. , Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 Minutes of May 23,2006 ~ 17 We have another member who's ill. In 18 addition, we're waiting for a 19 response from the County on the 20 matter that hasn't come through yet. 21 We're going to not do anything with 22 228 tonight and, Mr. Caviglia, 23 something else we should add to this? 24 MR. CA VIGLIA: I would like to 25 take the opportunity to see if we can "- ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 Minutes of May 23,2006 '-'" 2 stipulate among the parties, parties 3 meaning the applicant and those in 4 opposition, what's going to 5 constitute the record so it's not 6 muddled. 7 I have listed here the public 8 hearing testimony over several days 9 or evenings, the ZBA application for 10 the interpretation of variances, the 11 Planning Board application, the 12 decision of the zoning administrator 13 from which the appeal is taken, the 14 site plan provided to the ZBA by the ........ 15 applicant, the documents submitted by 16 the applicant and their perspective 17 tenant and the Simonettis and Mr. 18 Parsons through their Counsel in 19 opposition to the application, the 20 full EAF as supplemented by the 21 applicant and correspondence 22 submitted by the applicant and their 23 opponent. 24 I can't think of anything else 25 that would be germane. If we can get 2 an agreement or consensus. 3 MR. ADAMS: We're doing the "-" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 Minutes of May 23,2006 4 environmental review in the reverse '-- 5 order. The SEQRA regulations 6 contemplate any public forum for 7 comment on that. 8 MR. CA VIGLIA: You mean as part 9 of the public hearing? 10 MR. ADAMS: Yes. 11 MR. CA VIGLIA: I don't 12 anticipate that. 13 MR. STOLMAN: No public hearing 14 required for the benefit of everybody 15 else. With respect to everything 16 leading up to the determination of 17 significance, if one of the boards '-- 18 were to ask for an Environmental 19 Impact Statement, a Draft 20 Environmental Impact Statement, a 21 public hearing would still be 22 optional. Leading up to the 23 determination of significance, 24 anybody is able to look in the record 25 and make comment with respect to the 2 environmental assessment form. There 3 is no requirement. It would be 4 highly -- it would be rare. I'm not 5 sure there's ever been a public 6 hearing on everything leading up to 7 the determination of significance. ......... Town of Wappinger Page 6 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 8 MR. ADAMS: Normally that ......... 9 document would be submitted at the 10 beginning of the process so there II would be an opportunity to the formal 12 hearing for that document, as well as 13 the underlying issues with the 14 application. There's been none in 15 this proceeding. The EAF was 16 submitted after the close of the 17 public hearing. Is that procedure 18 going to be adhered to? 19 MR. CA VIGLIA: An EAF was 20 submitted, because of the issues 21 raised at the hearing some additional 22 -- a full EAF was required and I ......... 23 believe a technical report was 24 submitted with an amendment 25 addressing the noise issue. 2 MR. STOLMAN: We have a short 3 Environmental Assessment Form that 4 was received October 27 last year. 5 Then we have a full Environmental 6 Assessment Form received May 4th of 7 this year, and a recommendation that 8 I'm making is that there really 9 should be one Environmental 10 Assessment Form for the entire 11 proposed action. The new ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 12 "'" 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ...... 2 Page 7 Minutes of May 23,2006 Environmental Assessment Form we got in terms of the name of the action and the description of the action goes through the interpretation and the variances that are being asked for. What needs to be done is this all needs to be recast in one Environmental Assessment Form, a full EAF for the whole action, the special permit approvals being proposed, the site plan approval, the interpretation goes that way and the variances as well and the interpretation. 3 about a coordinated review? MR. ADAMS: You're talking 4 MR. STOLMAN: I wasn't talking 5 about a coordinated review. What I 6 was suggesting, instead of having one 7 Environmental Assessment Form for the 8 Planning Board part of this and one 9 Environmental Assessment Form for the 10 ZBA, there needs to be one combined 11 Environmental Assessment Form for the 12 whole project. 13 MR. WALSH: At what stage. 14 MR. STOLMAN: As soon as ..~ 15 possible. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 8 Minutes of May 23,2006 16 MR. WALSH: This is the first ~ 17 time it was brought up. 18 MR. STOLMAN: Right, correct. 19 MR. WALSH: What would be 20 important, if you don't mind, 21 respectfully a staff meeting be held 22 as soon as possible, like tomorrow, 23 or when everything is available to 24 carefully define what's going to be 25 in that. If the letter from the 2 Zoning Administrator on which the 3 motorcycle issue hinges is going to 4 be withdrawn or not on the grounds of 5 your lawyer or your report which said '-' 6 clearly there's a law in existence 7 that everybody forgot about. 8 MR. STOLMAN: Before we get 9 into any of that, I'm not sure how 10 far we should go with this tonight, 11 since we don't have a quorum. I 12 don't think there needs to be a 13 meeting to have the applicant prepare 14 an Environmental Assessment Form, a 15 full EAF that addresses the whole 16 action. What I'm suggesting, what's 17 been done so far be recast into one 18 EAF. One EAF. Shouldn't be a 19 separate EAF for each involved ...... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 20 '--' 21 Page 9 Minutes of May 23,2006 agency. You can imagine if there 22 might have five separate EAF's which were five involved agencies, you 23 would not be consistent with the law. 24 I'm not suggesting that we have to 25 scope the thing. All I'm saying 2 there needs to be one EAF for the 3 project. 4 MR. CA VIGLIA: Maybe have it 5 before the vote. 6 MR. WALSH: Obviously it's the 7 first we have heard of it. At the 8 last meeting I was very clear, you '-' 10 9 weren't here, I'm delighted you're here now, your firm is involved in 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 .'--' it. The process, the way the law was written to go further with the motorcycle facility, you're more familiar with the processes themselves. I want to make certain if Chris is here. MR. STOLMAN: I'll be here. MR. WALSH: We suddenly don't go off track again and say instead of the form everybody requested from this board, now we want something completely different. I know my time frames. I know from the close of Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 10 Minutes of May 23,2006 ~ 24 the public hearing no one brought 25 this up to now. I don't have a 2 problem doing that. I want to make 3 absolutely certain that's your 4 position to advise on that we know 5 exactly what you want in that and 6 cast it exactly the way you want it 7 done. I do not want to be in a 8 position here later on, that's not 9 it. 10 MR. FRY: I'm working with Don 11 Walsh. It was my understanding -- 12 I'm Mark Fry working with the 13 applicant. 14 It was my understanding that 15 the short form EAF form that was 16 submitted October 27th to the 17 Planning Board, before the Planning 18 Board accepted that form as complete, 19 which they did indeed do, they 20 declared to be Lead Agency for a 21 coordinated review. That short form 22 EAF, in my view, controls this 23 process going forward. In the event, 24 as often happens, that there has been 25 additional information requested, 2 whether or not it is in the form of a 3 long form EAF or additional 4 supplemental materials. Once the ~ "'-" Town of Wappinger Page 11 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 5 lead agency has been determined, once ...... 6 they have determined there's a 7 coordinated review, once the EAF has 8 been accepted, it becomes too late to 9 rescope the particular action, but 10 that the short form EAF indeed 11 controls. 12 At the request of the board, we 13 did submit additional materials, but 14 that did not constitute scoping. 15 While I agree it's -- I think the 16 coordinated review has already been 17 established. If you look in the 18 Planning Board minutes, you will find '-" 19 the Planning Board determined they 20 would look at this action through the 21 Planning Board site plan approval and 22 ZBA as a single action. 23 MR. STOLMAN: First of all, if 24 you could provide the basis for your 25 conclusions that you've just stated, 2 that would be good, because I don't 3 know where you're getting your 4 reasoning to make those conclusions. 5 So, if you could provide the basis 6 for everything you've said, that 7 would be great. 8 I don't believe this was a ........ Page 12 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 9 '-- 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 '-- 23 24 short form EAF for the ZBA, and on this process is, if we indeed did the Minutes of May 23,2006 coordinated review. It's not a coordinated review, and what was submitted to the Planning Board was simply a couple of boxes checked off, no analysis, no environmental analysis whatsoever. So, I think what we need is, we need enough n intormation needs to be in one Environmental Assessment Form. The ZBA, as one of the involved agencies in the uncoordinated review, would be in a position to issue a determination of significance. MR. FRY: What concerns me in 25 that basis the ZBA felt confident it 2 could schedule a public hearing, once 3 the public hearings have been 4 scheduled, based upon a particular 5 EAF, it's too late to say the EAF is 6 incomplete. In my view, the action 7 of going forward, having six months 8 of public hearings, precludes 9 essentially asking for a brand new 10 long form EAF and a new series of 11 public hearings. This is something I -- 12 would suggest that we could touch Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 13 Minutes of May 23,2006 13 base on perhaps in the next days and '--" 14 reach an agreement on how to proceed 15 under SEQRA. We don't want to make a 16 mistake. 17 MR. WALSH: We want to 18 address -- if you're going to be 19 reviewing it, I want to make sure 20 what you're looking for. 21 MR. ROBERTS: Albert Roberts, 22 attorney for the Planning Board. 23 I think it is very appropriate 24 whatever information is before the 25 Zoning Board be the same information 2 that's been presented to the Planning ~ 3 Board so that there can be some 4 consistency and some logic to 5 whatever decision your board makes, 6 and ultimately that the Planning 7 Board makes. If there's information 8 coming in under the SEQRA process, 9 everybody should have an opportunity 10 to quickly comment on it. I do think 11 the matter should be brought to a 12 conclusion. I do think due process 13 should permit everybody to comment 14 and Mr. Caviglia can work out a time 15 table for the submission of the 16 information and a quick review and ...... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 14 Minutes of May 23,2006 17 response by anybody that wants to do '-- 18 so. I want to urge that what 19 information is presented to the 20 Zoning Board also be presented to the 21 Planning Board so that both boards 22 are on the same playing field. 23 MR. WALSH: Frank wants to go 24 first. 25 MR. SIMEONE: If I may. Frank 2 Simeone, on behalf of Bill Parsons. 3 I'm sorry I'm late. 4 I can't stipulate to anything, 5 given the status of arriving late. I 6 apologize. I understood there was '-" 7 going to be a couple of public 8 hearings and this matter was to be 9 late. 10 Be that as it may, I agree with II everything Mr. Roberts said, except 12 for the adverb quickly. Just in 13 terms of a short review, I'd like to 14 note this matter proceeded before 15 this board on a particular 16 application, several -- on particular 17 sections of this zoning law, which 18 now I'm given to understand, pursuant 19 to Mr. Stolman's interpretation, 20 we're now being told, those of us in ....... Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 15 Minutes of May 23,2006 '-" 21 the position of opposition, we're now 22 being told the law doesn't read, and 23 doesn't intend to mean what it 24 plainly, to the rest of us, would 25 seem to mean. So that, as I 2 understand it, this application has 3 changed. It's changed courses in 4 midstream and now we're being told 5 that new requirements with respect to 6 a zoning code which is being read in 7 a completely different manner apply. 8 Be that as it may, I think, and I 9 raised this in my letter to your 10 board, this should require, if due 11 process is going to be given, a new 12 -- completely new application on this 13 supposed interpretation. My own 14 view, if this is in fact the 15 interpretation this board intends to 16 accept, the Town Board should 17 determine that, the determination as 18 to whether or not a special permit is 19 required in this zone. 20 With respect to the SEQRA 21 proceeding, I don't understand, 22 there's ever been a determination of 23 any Lead Agency in this matter. I 24 don't understand at this point who's "-'" "-'" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 16 Minutes of May 23,2006 25 going to make a determination of '-'" 2 significance, because there's been no 3 indication as to who's going to serve 4 as a Lead Agency in this matter. 5 Certainly standing here as an 6 opponent, we've gotten no 7 notification along those lines. With 8 respect to anything being moved 9 quickly, I would object. With 1 0 request for stipulation, I would 11 object, and for a matter to be 12 staffed, I would request the 13 opponents be given the opportunity to 14 sit in on that staffing. I would '-" 15 request the public hearing in this 16 matter be open, that the opponent be 17 given the opportunity to consult and 18 hire a noise consultant on their own 19 and respond to a long form EAF, which 20 has now been presented to us, a 21 potential fete compleat to be adopted 22 by this agency. Respectfully, I 23 object to the course you're intending 24 to take. 25 MR. ROBERTS: First of all, 2 it's my understanding that this is an 3 unlisted action and there is no 4 necessity to declare a Lead Agency. '-'" Town of Wappinger Page 17 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 5 I am only here to make sure so that I ......... 6 can report back to my board what is 7 occurring at your board. I want the 8 information that you have filtered 9 back to my board so that some 10 appropriate decisions can be made. 11 Now, if the application has changed, 12 I'm not really familiar with 13 precisely what goes on at the zoning 14 board. There's been a determination 15 that the motorcycles can be treated 16 as a retail use. That's different 17 than the application that's before 18 the Planning Board. This is why I ,..,. 19 thought that Counsel could agree on 20 what the record is so that your board 21 can make an appropriate decision and 22 this thing can move on. If it's 23 going to be litigated, so be it. 24 Let's get as much information in the 25 record as appropriate so both sides 2 would have an opportunity to their 3 appropriate due process rights. 4 MR. CA VIGLIA: First of all, 5 Mr. Simeone, I'm not clear what your 6 objecting to, as far as the 7 stipulation of the record. All I did ...... 8 was enumerate the things I considered Page 18 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 9 ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ....... 23 24 MR. ADAMS: I deem the record there any objection? Minutes of May 23,2006 to be part of the record and wanted a stipulation from the parties to make sure there is no confusion, that I'm not inadvertently excluding something from the record that one of you feels should be in the record. MR. SIMEONE: I understood that. Unfortunately, I walked in late. I understood there would be other matters taken on first. Put that aside. MR. CA VIGLIA: I want to get an answer, otherwise we're going to get into fifteen different issues. Is 25 to speak for itself. I wasn't 2 prepared tonight to go through my 3 inventory of documents and agree 4 simply by your reading the list that 5 it's a complete comprehensive 6 statement of the record. In this 7 case I would have to see all the 8 documents in order to indicate 9 whether or not there was an 10 agreement. I don't think you have ........ 12 11 those. MR. CA VIGLIA: We'll make a Town of Wappinger Page 19 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 13 determination on our own, absent a ........ 14 stipulation, as to what the record 15 is. There's been no determination 16 regarding the function or 17 applicability or the result of the 18 town code section 240-67 G I think 19 was the paragraph. So, I think Mr. 20 Roberts was incorrect on that. 21 That's not something that's been 22 determined. All of the issues that 23 were raised and going to be addressed 24 by the Zoning Board at the time of 25 their decision, so the concern here 2 about new matter, to me the only new ........ 3 matter I'm aware of is the wrinkle 4 that came up about having a unified 5 EAF, especially in view of the fact 6 that the Planning Board application 7 and in the fact there in differs from 8 the ZBA application because of the 9 alteration that's been represented by 10 the applicant as to what's going to 11 be done with building two. So, in 12 order to try to get some additional 13 reason, to get some uniformity, we 14 want to make sure everybody is 15 looking at the same thing. We '-'" 16 realize we're in front of this board Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 20 Minutes of May 23,2006 17 right now. This board is concerned '-' 18 about the issues that were raised 19 before it here and not necessarily 20 what's before the Planning Board. 21 Now, I think Mr. Stolman wanted to 22 address some of the points raised by 23 Mr. Simeone. 24 MR. STOLMAN: I was going to, 25 before Mr. Roberts made that 2 statement about this being an 3 unlisted action, I was going to talk 4 to that. Let me expand on that a 5 little bit. 6 If this were a type one action, ....... 7 we would have to give a coordinated 8 designation of lead agency. Since 9 this is an unlisted action, if the 10 Planning Board wanted to ask for a 11 DEIS, there would have to be 12 coordinated lead agency. It's not 13 required. 14 MR. ADAMS: It's still within 15 the discretion of the board and the 16 record cries out for coordinated 17 review, talked about uniformity and 18 consistency in one document, have one 19 decision based on that environmental ,..... 20 revIew. Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 21 Minutes of May 23,2006 21 MR. STOLMAN: It doesn't cry ......... 22 out for it. In many situations there 23 are a number of involved agencies. 24 In all of those cases there's one EAF 25 prepared for all those agencies. 2 SEQRA doesn't require coordinated 3 review if it's an unlisted action. 4 So, the record does not cry out for a 5 designation of lead agency. SEQRA 6 doesn't require it. It's up to the 7 ZBA and the Planning Board to decide 8 whether they want to or not. 9 MR. SIMEONE: When was it 10 determined and what body was it ... 11 determined that this was an unlisted 12 action? 13 MR. STOLMAN: I believe the 14 Planning Board determined that. 15 don't know the answer to that 16 question. I shouldn't even 17 speculate. 18 MR. WALSH: It was the Planning 19 Board. 20 MR. SIMEONE: Just so the 21 record is clear, as I understand it, 22 the only EAF before the board is the 23 EAF prepared by the applicant. It's ~ 24 not been approved or accepted or Town of Wappinger Page 22 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 25 acknowledged by anyone, other than "" 2 the applicant at this point. The EAF 3 that the objectors have had an 4 opportunity to review have not, and 5 had an opportunity to hire a 6 consultant to oppose it or submit 7 supporting argument in opposition to 8 that to this board or to any board, 9 and frankly I was shocked to come in 10 here and hear Mr. Cavaglia suggesting 11 that a record should be stipulated to 12 based on the recently submitted EAF 13 by the applicant. I believe the 14 objectants should have the '~ 15 opportunity to reopen the public 16 record so testimony can be taken from 17 both sides on the noise issue which 18 this board will acknowledge from the 19 very beginning has been the primary 20 reason why objections have been 21 voiced, not only by Mr. Adams' 22 clients and my clients, but by every 23 member of the public who's stood 24 before here, other than the applicant 25 on this matter. 2 MR. STOLMAN: Just to make my 3 position clear. This EAF that was 4 submitted to the Zoning Board of ~ Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 23 Minutes of May 23,2006 5 appeals was received by the town on ....... 6 May 4th. It's been here for almost 7 three weeks. I'm not suggesting that 8 there's anything wrong with it 9 substantively. I'm just talking 10 about a procedural matter, a format 11 matter. There needs to be an EAF, 12 the existing information on record, 13 can be recast on this one EAF, I'm 14 talking from a format or procedural 15 point of view. 16 MR. SIMEONE: My only 17 objection, as I understand it, we're 18 moving quickly to the point where the ....... 19 objectant won't be able to reopen the 20 public hearing so we can submit our 21 argument. 22 MR. STOLMAN: I'm trying to 23 make my position clear. 24 MR. WALSH: That's it then. 25 MR. DELLACORTE: Remember we 2 don't have a quorum tonight. 3 MR. WALSH: I know where you're 4 going with this. First of aU, I 5 have no problem with the stipulation 6 from what was read. It matches my 7 list. I understand that none of ~. 8 these gentlemen had a chance to look Town of Wappinger Page 24 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 9 at this before. Perhaps that can be ~ 10 coordinated. I have no problem with 11 that. 12 Second of all, the point B, the 13 member of the Planning Board, 14 remember the Planning Board referred 15 us here after they deemed a number of 16 their reports were complete, we 17 needed certain variances and special 18 use permits based upon the advice of 19 the zoning administrator. The change 20 in the application was because I 21 pulled one ofthe requests out when I 22 felt, 1 felt, not the board, I felt .~ 23 it wasn't necessary. I didn't want 24 to be sitting here saying, I'm asking 25 for a special use permit for a 2 motorcycle shop, when I knew very 3 well in my heart I didn't need one. 4 If it turns out I'm wrong, so be it. 5 I did the research, I read the town 6 files, I went back to '01 and I know 7 it wasn't in the zoning book. I had 8 the opportunity to review the files I 9 believe myself, you haven't found 10 that way, it backed what I said. The 11 reason we pulled it in the Zoning ~ 12 Board and not the Planning Board, the Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 25 Minutes of May 23, 2006 13 zoning book I was working with at the ......... 14 Planning Board didn't have that 15 section in it. Just so everybody is 16 clear on that. When we discovered it 17 here, it's in there published five 18 years later. The long and short of 19 it, I have no problem with it. I 20 want to make sure I have submitted to 21 this board every single thing that 22 went to the Planning Board. I 23 understand they want to make sure the 24 Planning Board gets back everything 25 happening here also. I want to make 2 sure we make absolutely certain I ........ 3 have no problem that you guys are 4 involved in that process, that we're 5 addressing this coordinator combined 6 EAF to whomever you want it addressed 7 to, the Planning Board, the Zoning 8 Board. 9 MR. STOLMAN: It doesn't get 10 addressed to anybody. It has, as you 11 know, the name of the action, which 12 should be the whole thing, not just 13 the special permit, not just the 14 vanances. Doesn't get addressed to 15 anybody. ........ 16 MR. WALSH: Just simply change Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 26 Minutes of May 23,2006 17 the first page. '-" 18 MR. STOLMAN: No, no. Let me 19 try to be more clear. 20 This EAF for the most part -- 21 well, let me think for a second. 22 It may come down to changing 23 the first page. We have to go 24 through this and see. It should 25 incorporate whatever you gave to the 2 Planning Board, which is not 3 incorporated in here. It's a matter 4 of taking the information, all of 5 which may have already been 6 submitted, and recasting it into one '-'" 7 EAF. 8 MR. WALSH: I will make sure of 9 that. I did pull and put in there 10 what I felt was germane to the 11 requirements. I would like to ask 12 you respectfully, as I conclude, that 13 you take a look at this in the next 14 day or so and we'll call you on 15 Thursday and let both Counsel know if 16 we're going to have a meeting or tell 17 us what you want. You ought to tell 18 us in a letter so they can see it as 19 well as us rather than us having any '-" 20 conversations, if that's fair enough Page 27 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals 21 '- Minutes of May 23,2006 22 said. The one thing I rejoiced at to you. We'll do exactly what you 23 the last meeting, you closed the 24 public hearing and when you close the 25 public hearing you have ten days for 2 written submissions that's to that. 3 So thank you very much. 4 MR. CA VIGLIA: Not anything 5 else at this juncture. 6 MR. DELLACORTE: There's a 7 discussion going on about the last 8 issue we were talking about. 9 MR. CA VIGLIA: We believe we '-" 1 0 ha ve a stipulation in trying to address the concerns raised during 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ........ 24 the colloquy earlier; that is, that it's been agreed and it will be stipulated that the applicant would submit within one week from this evening, for lack of a better word, a unified EAF that would be, copies would be provided to the town, meaning this board, as well as the Planning Board, also to the attorneys for the opponent, which I understand would be Mr. Adams and Mr. Simeone. Then the opponent of the applicant would have three weeks to submit Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 28 Minutes of May 23,2006 "-" 25 their written response to the board, 2 as well as to the applicants, and 3 then we would agree to have a public 4 hearing at a time which is going to 5 be determined now by this Board to 6 address those issues related solely 7 to the EAFT issues raised by the EAF 8 and what, if any, information has 9 been submitted by the opponent of the 10 application. 11 Is that fairly stated? 12 MR. SIMEONE: Yes. 13 MR. CA VIGLIA: What we need 14 from the board, assuming the board 15 agrees to this, suggested 16 stipulations are the dates following 17 four weeks from tonight when we would 18 have an opportunity, the town, the 19 board would need a brief opportunity 20 to review the information, we need an 21 evening where the public hearing on 22 that limited scope would take place. 23 MR. SIMEONE: June 27 would be 24 fine for me. 25 MR. STOLMAN: The 27th. 2 MR. CA VIGLIA: Is that 3 agreeable to all parties? 4 MR. FRY: Yes. "-" '-'" Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 29 Minutes of May 23,2006 ~ 5 MR. CA VIGLlA: Agreeable to the 6 board? 7 MR. DELLACORTE: Yes. 8 That would be a public hearing. 9 MR. CA VIGLlA: For the issues 10 raised in the EAF. 11 MR. FRY: Any other noticing 12 requirements we as the applicant need 13 to take in terms of public notice at 14 the new hearing? 15 MR. ROBERTS: There should be 16 another notice published. 17 MR. FRY: I was not involved in 18 the first round here. 19 MR. DELLACORTE: The public 20 hearing is set forth June 27th. ~ Appeal No. 06-7306 John & Pat Rone:o- Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an R-20 Zoning District. -Where a side yard setback of 10 feet is required, the applicant is proposine: a side yard setback of 2 feet, to allow for a lOX 20 foot shed, thus reQuestine: a variance of 8 feet. The property is located at 9 Namoth Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6258-04-960002 in the Town of Wappinger. Mr. Prager: At the last meeting you asked for your shed to be 2 feet from the property line and we informed you that you would have to either move it 1 foot in or meet the fire rating. Mr. Rongo: I move the shed in 1 foot. Mrs. Dao: I went out there and have taken pictures to show that it was moved. Mr. Prager: Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience with a comment? Hearing none. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Thank you for moving it. Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. ~ Page 30 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Ms. McEvoy-Riley: ........ Mr. DellaCorte: Roll Call: Minutes of May 23,2006 Motion to grant the variance. This does not appear to be undesirable, there doesn't seem to be a more feasible method for this although it is substantial and is self-created. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Prager: Aye. Aye. Aye. Appeal No. 06-7307 Joe Clement Inc.- 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 proposine: a rear yard setback of 21.6 feet. to allow for a 24 X 32 foot garage, thus reQuestine: a variance of 18.4 feet. The property is located at 54 Easter Road and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6056-01-259729 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Roberti: ~ Mr. Prager: Mr. Clement: Mr. Prager: Mr. Clement: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Clement: Mr. DellaCorte: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Vote: Mr. DellaCorte: Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Roll Call: ",..,.. Joe Clement Louis Scalfoni Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Are the mailings in order? Yes. Swore in the applicant. The garage is already there but was put in the wrong spot and is approximately 10 years old. Did you get a building permit? This is not my property, I am looking to purchase it. Is there anyone in the audience with a question? Hearing none. We did go out and do a site visit. Is there a ROW on this property? I believe it is on the next parcel. Motion to close the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Motion to grant the variance. The garage is existing and it doesn't seem feasible to re-locate it. It is not undesirable although the variance is substantial and self-created. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Prager: Aye. Aye. Aye. Page 31 Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes of May 23,2006 Appeal No. 06-7313 Susan & Max Dao- 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 proposine. a rear yard setback of 15 feet, to allow for an above ground pool, thus reQuestine. a variance of 25 feet. The property is located at 2 Dwver Lane and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6257-02-790510 in the Town of Wappinger. ....... Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Roberti: Mr. Prager: Mrs. Dao: Mr. Prager: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. DellaCorte: ~ Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Roll Call: Motion to open the public hearing. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Are the mailings in order? Yes. Swore in the applicant. I would like to put in an 18 foot above ground pool and I don't have much of a rear yard because I am on a comer. We did a site visit and you have a lot ofland that you can't use. Is there anyone in the audience with a comment? Hearing none. Your yard has minimal flat ground and the spot you choose is ideal. Motion to grant the variance. This is self-created but it is the best spot for it and this will not cause any environmental impacts. Second the motion. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Mr. Prager: Aye. Aye. Aye. Appeal No. 06-7299 John Dee.nan - Seeking an area variance of Section 240-37 of District Regulations in an HD Zoning District. _ Where a lot depth of 300 feet is reQuired, the applicant is proposine. a lot depth of 260 feet to allow for a pre-existing condition, thus reQuestine. a variance of 40 feet. The property is located at 1708 Route 9 and is identified as Tax Grid No. 6158-02-543530 in the Town of Wappinger. Present: Mr. Adams: Mr. Stolman: Mr. A. Roberts: ........ Jon Adams A 90 days extension is granted for the closed public hearing. The PB has determined that this is a Type 1 action. Lead agency was circulated last September, 2005 and the ZBA has granted their consent to the PB to be lead agent. The PB will make the determination of significance and the ZBA needs to wait for that. The applicant has also been referred to DC Planning and we must wait for them to get back to us. Should the public hearing be re-opened David? Town of Wappinger Zoning Board of Appeals Page 32 Minutes of May 23,2006 Mr. Stolman: I'm not sure, it may not be necessary. I don't think we can put a date on the extension at this point as to when the PB will rule. ........ Mr. Adams: I consent to the extension until SEQRA is determined by the PB. Mr. Caviglia: We have a stipulation on Myers Comers Road and it has been agreed to by the applicant that they will submit one week from today, one unified EAF. They will also send copies to both Mr. Adams and Mr. Simeone. In turn Adams and Simeone will have three weeks to review it and submit their response. Then we will have a public hearing to address those issues solely related to the EAF. So we need dates from the ZBA. Mr. DellaCorte: We will hold the public hearing on June 27, 2006 for the EAF only. Ms. McEvoy-Riley: Mr. DellaCorte: Vote: Motion to adjourn. Second the motion. All present voted aye. Meeting ended at 9: 15 PM Respectfully Submitted,- ? I 1 ", . / / C / (~iiiM{c( 1~'~~-;fJ J;)a~fa Roberti, Secretary Secretary - Zoning Board of Appeals '-" '-"