Loading...
1983-04-12Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting April 12, 1983 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wappinger held its regular meeting on April 12, 1983 in the meeting room of the Town Hall, Mill Street, Wappingers Falls, New York. Mrs. Waddle called the meeting to order at 8:00 PM. She asked the secretary if the abutting propoerty owners had been notified. Mrs. Russ stated they had been according to the records available in the assessor's office. Mrs. Waddle then asked for a roll call. Members Present: Mrs. Carol Waddle, Chairperson Charles Cortellino Joseph Landolfi Angel Caballero George Urciuoli (arrived at 8:30 PM) Others present: Hans Gunderud, Bldg. Insp./Zoning Adm. Betty Ann Russ, Secretary Mrs. Waddle gave a brief explanation of how the meeting would be run. She then read the first appeal #656 at the request of Nils U. Andersson, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 404.31 of Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for a fifty percent expansion of an existing non -conforming business said non -conforming business being located on his property on Old Myers Corners Road, being parcel # 6258-04-535305, in the Town of Wappinger. Representative: Henry Mierzwa, 2 Cottonwood Hill explained the variance is requested to modernize the building. Nils Andersson is the current owner; he is the tenant and maintains a business located on the facility. He showed the board photos and plans of the current buildings. He told the board Mr. Andersson was seventy one and planning to retire. He stated he would like to put the building under a common roofline. It is currently approximately 10,000 sq. ft., 212 stories He wants to maintain the outside structure as it is and have a 16 ft. interiour ceiling where it is currently a 10 foot ceiling. The 50 foot expansion will encompass a total of 16.000 sq. ft. but of that he would be using, proportionaltely, 25 % new ground space of the 500 he is allowed under the law. The reason he is asking for the 50% is just in case he wants to use it in the future, in reality it is only a 25% expansion. He was told hw could not declare a hardship if he purchased the property right away, and that was the reason why the variance is under Nils Andersson name and he (Mr. Mierzwa) is representing it. He has been in the building 4 years this July. (1983) Mrs. Waddle asked for an artist's conception of how the vuilding would look when finished. Mr. Mierzwa stated he did not,as plans for modernization were approximately 5 years down the road. He would first have to generate the capital to purchase the building, which has approximately 36 acres of land with it. It would ideally be a Butler type building. *... Mrs. Waddle concluded he was not interested in expansion at the current time. Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page 2 Mr. Mierzwa reiterated that he had been told he could not declare a hardship if he purchased the property first so he was securing the variance first. The property is legally non -conforming, Mr. Andersson had been in business since 1946. The property is zoned R-20. Mr. Cortellino asked Mr. Gunderud if the right to the 50% expansion of a non- conforming business is transferred when the property is sold. Mr. Gunderud stated it was as long as the business was the same. Mr. Cortellino explained the situation to Mr. Mierzwa, so he does not need a variance prior to purchasing the property. Mr. Gunderud explained it was the second part of the application that needed to be done by the current owner. Mrs. Waddle stated they had to act on the first variance before proceeding to the next. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else to speak for or against this variance. Mr. Hayes owns property adjoining the property. He was unclear as to what the 50% expansion dealt with, the size of the building, size of clientel, number of employees, etc. Mr. Cortellino told him it was the size of the building. Mr. Hayes stated he had lived next to Mr. Andersson for 15 years and had gotten along well byt he was concerned if an absentee owner could take as much care and concern for others. Mrs. Waddle stated the Zoning Board could not control that. Mr. Gunderud stated the non -conforming use is for the owner to live there and run his business. If the owner did not live there he would be changing the non -conforming use and would have to come before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Cortellino and Mrs. Waddle felt that it would be less non -conforming if the owner did not live there and would probably be allowed almost automatically. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak for or against this appeal. There was no one. Mr Caballero did not want to grant the expansion without any plans to look at. Mr. Cortellino agreed. Mr. Mierzwa asked if they wanted an outline or specific plans. Mrs. Waddle stated they wanted specific plans (artist's rendition) to see just what the building would look like. She offered to table any action until the plans could be drawn. Mr. Mierzwa asked what the maximum number of people he was allowed to employ in the non -conforming use. Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page 3 Mrs. Waddle asked what the maximum number people were there under Mr. Andersson. Mr. Mierzwa stated there had been approximately 20 at the business's prime time. Mrs. Waddle asked how many were employed at the present. Mr. Mierzwa stated there were 7 including the corporate officers. Discussion, size of expansion, maximum of 30, more like 15. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to table action. Mr. Mierzwa asked what restrictions were placed on his non -conforming business. Mr. Cortellino told him he had to come before the ZBA just about anytime he wanted to make an alteration. Mr. Caballero seconded the motion. Vote: 4 ayes 1 absent Motion carried. Appeal tabled. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #657 at the request of Mr. Nils Andersson seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 404.1 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the subdivision of a legally non -conforming lot located on Old Myers Corners Rd., and being parcel # 6258-04-535305, in the Town of Wappinger. Representative: Mr. Mierzwa Mr. Mierzwa stated that he was told if he wanted to build a single family house, he could not because the whole 36 acres is considered non -conforming. He would like to bring 30 acreas into conformity. The remaining 6 acres would stay non- conforming and would allow for a buffer zone. He is looking for a variance to allow a single family residence and rezone 30 acres. Mr. Gunderud stated he needed to subdivide. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak for or against this variance. Ron Anderson, had spoken with Mr. Gunderud about the subdivision and had been told that it was just basically so that if the land does get sold he's not stuck. If he has to sell off some land and wants to put a house on a smaller lot, this will be a freedom to do that. Mr. Hayes was concerned with the plans for subdividing. He wanted to know if the 30 acres would or could be broken up into lz acre or acre lots, whatever it was zoned. Mrs. Waddle stated he could do that if he went to the Planning Board and they approved it but she did not think that was what they were planning at this 1•► time. Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page 4 Mr. Mierzwa stated he was only planning on one single family residence. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to allow the applicant to go to the Planning Board for the subdivision. Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried. Mr. Mierzwa asked about the planning board. Mrs. Waddle told him Mr Gunderud could help him with that. She the announced the next appeal. #660 - at the request of Michael S & Rosemarie L. Ranowicz, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 412 of the Tow -of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for a vuilding permit on a lot which does not have legal road frontage for the purposed construction of a 46 foot by 26 foot ranch style single-family home, on property located on Blueberry Hill and Locust Drive, being parcel # 6256- 02-840893, in the Town of Wappinger. Representative: M. Ranowicz Mr. Ranowicz stated he was currently libing right above the parcel and would like to build a new home on that parcel. Mrs. Waddle noted they had no legal road frontage. The roads in the area were all private roads. Mr. Landolfi pointed out the possible hardships with houses on private road. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against this appeal. Mr. Ed Ziherl, Locust Drive, his property is across the road from the property and it is a nice homesite. One of the problems they have had in that area is dumping, and by vuilding the home there it would help cure that problem. He also stated there were 3 neighbors with snowplows to maintain the road. Mr. Caballero made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Urciuoli seconded the motion. Vote: 5 aye. Motion carried. The variance was granted. Mrs. Waddle announced the next appeal. #661 - at the request of Earl A. Churchill, seeking a variance of Article IV Section 422 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow a storage shed to be placed with only a three foot sideyard where ten feet is required on property located on Route 9D, in HUghsonville, being parcel #6157- 01-059624. Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page 5 Representative: Earl Churchill, Hughsonville Mr. Churchill explained he needed the shed for storage and he has a very narrow lot. He has property across the street but it is in the process of being sold, so he has to make some arrangements for storage. Mrs. Waddle knew the situation. Mr. Caballero asked why the shed had to be placed so close to the fence, you have a 65 yard. Mr. Churchill stated the the problem was the septic tank and fields were located there. Mr. Cortellino wanted to know what would be stored in the shed. Discussion on how shed woud be used, what it was tp be built of, location of septic fields, common driveway, lack of backyard space, narrowness of lot. Mrs Waddle asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against this variance. There was no one. Mr. Landolfi made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Urciuoli seconded the motion. Vote 5 aye. Motion carried. Variance was granted. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #662 - at the request of Rev. Verner R. Matthews, seeking a variance of Article IV Section 412 of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the subdivision of a lot on a private road said property being located on New Drive off Stoneykill Road, being parcel # 6156-01-171580. Representative: Reverend Verner Matthews, N.J. Rev. Matthews presented a surveyors map of the property to the board and explained the situation. He had purchased the property in March 1982. The problem with the property was that it was originally subdivided incorrectly the zoning laws require 125 foot frontage and the property only has 100 feet. He had been consulting with Mr. Gunderud for the past year in trying to make the property conforming. He has taken 25 feet of the existing property and deed it to that property to make it conforming in order to get a Building permit. He would like to build on this particular piece of property. Discussion, what the problems were, the other problem was it was on a private road. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against this variance. Ralph Valentine, off Stoneykill Road on Valentine Drive. He had been forced to ,%WW build that road prior to building on his lot and he is required to maintain the road If they build a church, there will b e an increase in traffic and he Zoning Board of Appeals needs help on the road. in maintaining the road. April 12, 1983 Page 6 He does not mind the church, but he would like help Mr. Cortellino stated the maintenance of the road was between the people who live on it because it was a private road. Mr. Valentine stated if he (Rev. Matthews) was willing to buy the stuff to put on the road, the material, he (Mr. Valentine) was willing to do the work. Mrs. Waddle stated that between the two of them they should settle it. Discussion, he was building a home, not a church. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried, variance granted. Rev. Matthews would like to commend Mr.Gunderud for all his assistance in the past year. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #663 - at the request of Stanley Zablocki, seeking an interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance with regard to which Zoning Ordinance would govern a previously issued Special Use Permit and or a variance of Article IV, Section 438 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for a Special Use Permit to be in effect although the time limit has expired,with regard to property located on Widmer Road, being parcel #6158-02-735535. Representative: Stanley Zablocki Mr. Zablocki stated he was looking for an interpretation of the special use permit. Mr. Caballero asked Mr. Gunderud if this SUP was granted with a time limit. Mr. Gunderud stated he found no time limit in the records, at the time, under the old Zoning Ordinance, the SUP was granted there was no time limit as there is under the present zoning ordinance. Mrs. Waddle thought the interpretation would have to be under the new zoning ordinance. Mr. Zablocki asked that Mrs. Waddle read the original Z.O. section of SUP/ Discussion, Mr. Zablocki would like to be granted the sam SUP, time limitation, public hearing, new zoning laws, old zoning laws. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to require a public hearing for a new SUP. Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page 7 Motion carried, a new public hearing was required. Mr. Gunderud summarized the interpretation as being to follow the new zoning ordinance, the variance is denied to be resubmitted. Discussion - variance or interpretation, 1979 Zoning Ordinance, SUP good or not good, physical activity not having taken place, whether a public hearing is needed or not. Mr. Urciuoli stated he had a validated SUP in 1979 without a time limit. Mr. Cortellino felt that since no building permit was applied for that this should be considered a new SUP. Mrs. Waddle found a time limit of one year, unless otherwise stated by the ZBA, in the 1979 ordinance.; Mr. Gunderud stated that ordinance was not in effect until 1980 because they had not had an EIS. He had to use the 1963 ordinance until then. Mrs. Waddle brought up the idea of double jeopardy. Mr. Landolfi stated a motion had been made and voted on. Discussion - justification of new public hearing. Mr. Zablocki pointed out that letter had been sent and a builder had been found. He had been working on the project but a few years ago the money ran out. He doesn't understand what the permit has to do with it. Discussion. The board had decided to request a new application be made. Discussion, builder, lapse of time, etc. Mrs. Waddle ecplained for the audience's benefit that Mr. Zablocki would be in next month for a new SUP and a public hearing. She the read the next appeal. #664 - at the request of Mr. & Mrs. Bernard Loeb, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 421 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance to allow for an addition to be vuilt with a fifteen feet sideyard setback where twenty- five feet ie required, on property located on 24 Fox Hill Road, being parcel # 6257-01-453810. Representative: Jill & Bernard Loeb Mr. Loeb stated they would like to extend their living room by 10 feet. Mrs. Loeb stated they were not going closer to the sideline, they were extend- ing the living room. The house had been built to close to begin with. Mrs. Waddle asked if there were any questions from the board. There were none. She then asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against the variance. M Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1983 Page8 Mr. Landolfi made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Caballero seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried. The variance was granted. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #665 - at the request of Raymond A. Menconeri, seeking a Special Use Permit to operate a motor vehicle repair and service business on property located on Route 9D, being parcel #6057-04-785105. Representative: Raymond A. Menconeri, Maple Street, Wappingers Falls, Mr. Menconeri would like to request a S.U.P. He showed the board the blue prints and explained the situation. Mr. Caballero asked Mr. Gunderud if the repair shop waa an allowable use in that area with a S.U.P. Mr. Gunderud stated that it was. Discussion, location, area. Mr. Urciouli made a motion to refer it to the planning board. Mr. Caballero seconded it. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried, The appeal was referred to the Planning Board. Discussion as to what the planning board would need. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. # 666 - at the request of Dean MacGeorge, seeking a Special Use Permit, to operate a motor vehicle repair and service business on property located on Route 82 near All Angels Hill Road, being parcel # 6357-03-238025. Representative: None. Discussion as to type of situation. Mr. Landolfi made a motion to refer the appeal to the Planning Board. Mrs. Waddle seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried. The appeal was referred to the planning board. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was any other business to come before the board. There was none. Zoning Board of Appeals April 12, 1984 Page 9 Discussion in general. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Betty Ann Russ Secretary LC/fh %SW