1983-07-12Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983
The Zoning Board of Appeals held their regular meeting on July 12, 1984 at
the meeting room of the Town Hall, Mill Street, Wappingers Falls, NY.
Mrs. Waddle called the meeting to order. She then asked for the roll call.
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Carol Waddle, Chairperson
Charles Cortellino
Joseph Landolfi
Angel Caballero
George Urciuoli
Betty Ann Russ, Secretary
Mrs. Waddle gave a brief explanation of how the meeting will be run. She
asked if all the abuuting property owners had been notified.
Mrs. Russ replied they had been according to the records available in the
assessor's office.
Mrs. Waddle read the first appeal.
#674 - At the request of the Randolph School, seeking an amended special use
permit pursuant to Article IV, Section 421, paragraph 4 of the Town of Wappinger
Zonin g Ordinance, to permit two additions to the existing building to be used
as a shop/classroom and library/classroom on their property located at 115
South Avenue Extesnion (Rt. 9D) being parcel #6157-01-216814.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone present to speak for this appeal. No one
was there. She then asked if there was anyone to speak against this appeal.
There was no one. She asked Mrs. Russ if the appellant knew they were scheduled
to appear this evening.
Mrs. Russ replied they had been sent the notice.
Mr. Cortellino made a motion to table the appeal.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote: 4 ayes, 1 absent.
Motion carried. Appeal was tabled.
Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal.
#689 - at the request of Pizzagalli Development Company, seeking a variance of
Article IV, Section 422, Schedule of Regulations for non-residential districts
OR -10A of the Town of Wappinger where one hundred and fifty (150) foot setback
is required, to allow a fifty (50) foot setback, on property located off Myers
Corners Road, being parcel # 6258-03-278358.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone to speak for or against this appeal. There
was no one. She then asked if there was anyone to represent this appeal. There
was no one. She decided to table it until later in the evening.
Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal.
*40W #690 - at the request of Ethel Zettl Zagyva, seeking a variance of Article IV,
Section 421 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit an apartment
to be added to a single family residence on property located on Kent Road, being
Om
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983 Page 2
parcel # 6258-03-212123.
Representative: Harry Satz, Poughkeepsie,
Mr. Satz stated the structure had actually been used as a two-family dwelling
since 1973. He explained the history of the property. Mrs. Zagyva,then
Miss Zettl, purchased some property in 1962 where they operated a hotel and
Hungarian restaurant. A piece of the property across the road was sold at
a later date, then the corner piece with the hotel building was sold. They
kept what had been 2 appendages to the hotel, one was an 8 room annex and
the other was a cabin, in which there had been an occupant on the second floor.
In 1973, they made an application to convert the 8 room building to 3 apartments.
They thought the cabin was a 2 family residence and did not discover it was
not until Mrs. Zagyva made a contract to sell the property to the same person
who bought the corner piece, Mr. Chandler. The same reasons that prompted the
board to grant the variance in 1973 for the large building exist for the cabin.
Mr. Landolfi explained the hotel uses were in existance prior to zoning.
Mr. Satz stated Mrs. Zagyva had operated the buildings as a 2 family and a
3 family dwelling since 1973 not realizing the 2 family dwelling was legally only
a single family dwelling. Mr. Zagyva died approximately 2 years ago.
Mrs. Waddle stated both she and Mr. Landolfi were on the board in 1973 and what
they had done was allow the conversion of the 8 room building in a 3 family
dwelling becuase there was a single family dwelling on the property already.
and the building was much larger than they needed. The board had allowed 4
legally non -conforming dwellings on that piece of property not 5.
Mr. Satz stated the application for the other one was made in November after
the application to convert the 8 room building was granted. He had been trying
to reconstruct what happened and had the second application.
Mr. Cortellino stated it was a building permit.
Mr. Satz stated the application was for a building permit, however, the building
was built as a 2 family from the start.
Mrs. Waddle noted the building permit clearly stated single family.
Discussion - used as a 2 family, taxed as a 2 family, C.O. never issued, building
permit for single family.
Mrs. Waddle asked Mrs. Russ to see if a C.O. had ever been issued. She then read
the letter from the DC Dept of planning. They were concerned with increased
density, traffic, and the possible setting of a precident if the variance is
granted.
Mrs. Russ found the C.O. for the building, it was for a single family dwelling.
Mrs. Waddle asked if the second apartment had been added at a later date.
Mr. Satz stated Mrs. Zagyva was present and could answer that question more
clearly.
�r
`*AW
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983 Page 3
Mrs. Zagyva stated the second unit was added in 1972 or 73, when the variance
was received.
Discussion - what variance was for, what building permit was for, etc.
Mrs. Waddle asked how many rooms were upstairs.
Mrs. Zagyva stated there were 2, a bedroom and a living room
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was a kitchen.
Mrs. Zagyva stated there was a kitchenette off the living room.
Mrs. Waddle asked what was in it.
Mrs. Zagyva stated a regular kitchen.
Discussion, second apartment built illegally, inspections were made, size of
kitchen (8'10" x 41)
Mr. Caballero stated that as he understood it, the problem was the contract
to sell stated 5 residences and they were only allowed 4 legally.
Mr. Satz stated that was the reason the application was being made.
Discussion - reducing non -conforming from eight to four and now increasing it
from four to five.
Mr. Satz reiterated that Mrs. Zagyva did not know she was operating illegally.
Mr. Cortellino stated the building could be made to conform fairly easily, by
removing the kitchen area.
Discussion - chance to rent whole house, number of bedrooms downstairs (2), problem
is fullfilling the contract which stated 5 dwelling impact on area, etc.
Mrs. Waddle asked if anyone wished to speak on the appeal.
Mr. Robert Taylor owns the hotel next door now and while he sympathizes with
Mrs. Zagyva, he is concerned about the parking.
Fred Murray, Spook Hill Road - there is no access to the upstairs apartments
from downstairs, it has a separate entrance. To convert to one family would
mean not only taking out the kitchen but putting in an inside stairway. He
also stated there were only 7 people living in the buildings to his knowledge
and he did not know how there could be 8 cars.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else present who wished to speak. There
was no one. She then closed the public hearing.
Discussion among the board members.
Mr. Caballero made a motion to deny the variance.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote: 4 ayes, 1 absent.
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12,1983 Page 4
Motion carried. Appeal for variance denied.
Mrs. Waddle stated they would go back to Appeal # 689 and reread the appeal.
Mrs. Waddle stated she would conduct the hearing but abstain from voting.
Representative: Doug Schner, Real Estate Property Manager.
Mr. Schner apologized for being late and explained there request was for a
50 foot setback off their southerly property line, which is adjacent to their
existing facility on Myers Corners Road to facilitate the movement of personnell
between buildings, the existing one and the proposed one. The proximity of the
buildings is very important to their client. They would be having a connecting
link between the buildings and the 150foot setback design of the building and the
potential user of the building. They would also like to minimize the amount of
land distrubed in the area. They have kept a 250 foot buffer zone to the lands
adjacent to those of Jonah Sherman and they have kept a good buffer zone to the
north,northeast, between the potential residential areas. They felt keeping
the buildings close together was the best way to do this.
Mr. Cortellino noted that Pizzagalli had been in for several variances since the
Town Board granted the rezoning. There is only one adjoining property owner. They
should have had a coordinated plan at the beginning so the full impact could have
been determined. This was one of the agreements of the people, if you put this
here at this time, how do we know you won't ask for more next time.
Discussion "the issue at hand".
Mr. Schner stated they were asking for a variance to the 150ft. guidelines. They
had appeared before the board previously for parking and loading dock require-
ments ... The setback requirement was an oversite on their part when they were
trying to locate the building. It was picked up by the Zoning Administrator,
Hans Gunderud, after the fact. He stated this was the reason they were here
again and they didn't like it anymore than the board did. He tried to find
the least objectional method to solve their problem and this way did not have an
impact on anyone.
Mr. Cortellino felt that walking the 100 feet was not that long, he walked that
far to go to his mailbox which was right in front of his house.
Mr. Schner explained the connecting link between the buildings was already at
300 feet and an addition 100 feet would make a 400 foot length and they felt it
would be improper planning on both Pizzagalli's part and the users part.
He reiterated that to put the building back they would have to clear more of the
forested area and disturb the landscape which they are trying to avoid as much
as possible. They were try to contain and consolidate the activity and maximize
the buffer zones.
We've been very sensitive to Jonah Sherman's needs and the Town Board's needs
and requests and we felt we have satisfied his desires.
Jonah Sherman stated he did not sell the property but he had been kept up to date
and he felt the benefit to the Town, in terms of moving the building closer, seems
to have a great deal of merit, it would be better for the handicapped and to make
`%W it as easy to use as possible will have a great advantage. He also heard the
New Hackensack Fire Department thought it might be to their advantage to have the
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983 Page 5
access road closer to the building. He felt that by moving the building away
from the (Cranberry Hills) development area and increasing the screening it
would make the property more developable.
Mr. Caballero asked if moving the building closer would make it less visible
from the street.
Mr. Schner stated you will be able to see the top floor only, from Myers
Corners Rd, If the building were moved back the 100 feet, you might be able
to see more of the second story and possibly some of the first floor. He was
not sure.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else who wished to be heard. There
was no one. She then closed the Public hearing.
Mr. Caballero made the motion to grant the variance.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote: 3 aye 1 abstain (Carol Waddle) 1 absent
Motion carried. The variance was granted.
Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal.
#674 - (this was the first appeal of the evening that was tabled until now)
Representative: Tom Peck, builder
Mrs. Waddle asked to see some plans.
Discussion - additions off back, barely seen from road, consistent with present
structure (brick), single story, type of "shop", pottery, saw and hammer, no power
tools.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone to speak for or against this variance.
There was no one. She closed the public hearing.
Mr. Cortellino made a motion to grant the variance.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote: 4 aye 1 absent
Motion carried. The amendment was granted subject to site plan approval.
Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal.
# 691 - at the request of Katherine E. Miller, seeking a variance of Article IV,
Section 404.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit her to construct a 131x16'
screened porch to be added to a legally non -conforming mobile home on property
located on 11 All Angels Hill Road, being parcel #6259-04-556127.
Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone to speak for or against this variance.
There was no one. She asked Mrs. Russ if Mrs. Miller knew she was supposed to
show up.
'Iftow
Mrs. Russ replied that she had been sent a copy of the notice. Mrs. Russ has
not had any personal contact with Mrs. Miller.
0
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983 Page6
Mrs. Waddle stated she had a letter from Mrs. Miller that gave her the feeling
that she felt she did not have to be present.
Discussion, did the board need more information to act?
Mr. Landolfi made a motion to table the appeal.
Mr. Cortellin seconded it.
Vote: 4 aye 1 absent
Motion carried. The appeal for the variance was tabled.
Discussion as to how much of the deck was built.
Mrs. Waddle asked Mrs. Russ to have Hans Gunderud call her at her office Thurs-
day to clarify this matter and have Mrs. Miller come to the next meeting. She
then read the next appeal.
#692 - at the request of Thomas and Judith Connors, seeking a variance of
Article IV, Section 421 of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow a deck with a 25'
rear yard setback where 40' is required, on property located at 13 Pippin Lane,
being parcel #6258-04-559146.
Representative: Thomas Connors
Mr. Connors explained the main reason for requesting the variance was because
there was a large solid rock at one end of the property and across the front
which determined the location of the house when it was built. There is no
room for any additions between the setback requirements and the rock. He showed
the board a plan. There is a sliding door off the kitchen with a small walkway
deck (4'x8') which is fairly well rotted and must be taken down for safety.
Mrs. Waddle was concerned with what is behind the property and to the sides.
Mr. Connors stated there was nothing in back, 1 lot with a house up front, here.
Mrs. Waddle stated it was just somebody's back yard.
Mr. Connors showed the board some pictures to help explain the situation.
Discussion as to location, surrounding area, where nearby houses are located.
Mr. Connors would like to put a 16' x 12' deep screened deck off the sliding
door off the ditchen and another 16'x12' open deck alongside the garage. He
felt it would improve the overall appearance of the area. Both the neighbors
adjoining his property wrote letters stating they would give their support.
Mrs. Waddle asked the letters be entered into the file. She then asked if there
was anyone else who wished to speak. There was no one. She then closed the
public hearing.
Mr. Caballero made a motion to grant the variance.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote: 4 ayes 1 absent
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983 Page 7
Motion carried. Variance granted.
Mrs. Waddle noted that Darcel Hungerford, Appeal #685, under unfinished business
was here but has small child with him and took her out.
#685 - at the request of Darcel Hungerford, seeking a variance of Article IV,
Section 421 of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow for an extension of the time limit
to remove a 121x60' mobile home from property located on Curry Road, being parcel
# 6157-01-494622.
Discussion, the trailer is being used, Mr. Caballero believes Mrs. Hungerofrd
lives in the trailer, not an apartment.
Mrs. Waddle stated the board has been granting extension on this trailer since
1975. Other prople were only given 2 six month extensions maximum. She would
entertain a motion from the board.
Mr. Landolfi suggested a 3 month extension to take some action.
Discussion.
Mrs. Waddle asked who the trailer belonged to in 1975.
Mrs. Russ stated the previous appeals were under John Guido, her father.
Mr. Cortellino asked what the original purpose for the trailer was.
Mrs. Russ stated it was originally granted to keep Mr. Guido's mother.
Mrs. Waddle felt that since the trailer is on Mr. Guido's property, it was his
responsibility also to remove the trailer.
Discussion.
Mr. Caballero made a motion to allow 3 months to remove the trailer, no further
extensions to be granted.
Mr. Cortellino seconded the motion.
Vote 4 ayes, 1 absent
Motion carried. 3 month extension granted.
Mrs. Waddle stated she had some thing she would like to discuss before the meeting
was adjourned. The first one is the sign in front of the Wappingers Plaza with
stores for rent. She is concerned with the Dollar Rental sign on New Hackensack
Road. and the Heany Sign. Mrs. Waddle is also concerned with Stage Door sign.
Her other question involves Zoning laws and that is where vetinarian's office is
allowed to be. Is it permitted in shopping plaza. Dr. Weiss is in George's
shopping plaza.
Mrs. Russ stated Dr. Weiss had talked to Mr. Gunderud before moving in and
evidently Mr. Gunderud had determined it to be a permitted use. She stated she
would talk to Mr. Gunderud and have him get together with the board. She also
stated that the Zoning for that area permitted residential uses and vet's offices
came under residential uses.
Zoning Board of Appeals July 12, 1983
Page 8
Discussion - zoning for the plaza, Community Animal Hospital in Poughkeepsie,
lot size required, ZBA challenges Zoning Administrator's decision.
I%W Mr. Cortellino made a motion to adjourn.
Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion.
Vote 4 ayes 1 absent
Motion carried. The meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty Ann Russ
Secretary
LC/fh