Loading...
1983-11-15Zoning Board of Appeals November 15, 1983 The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wappinger held its regular meeting in the meeting room of the Town Hall, Mill Street, New York, on November 15, 1983. Mrs. Waddle called the meeting to order. She asked the secretary if the abutting property 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 the roll call. Members Present: Carol Waddle, Chairperson Charles Cortellino George Urciuoli Joseph Landolfi Angel Caballero Others Present: Hans Gunderud, Building Insp./Zoning Adm. Joe Tinelli, Deputy Building 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. #706 - at the request of Med Hudson Christian Church, seeking a special use permit pursuant to Article IV, Section 421 paragraph 4 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance to permit a place of worship on property located on All Angels Hill Road, being parcel # 6257-02-986805, consisting of 5.67 acres. Representative: Jack Economou, attorney Mr. Economou believed the information had been submitted for the board's review and he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Cortellino asked when they planned to build the building. Mr. Economou stated the church was in the process of closing on the land and raising funds to vuold the building as soon as that could be done, they would begin construction. Mr. Cortellino felt it was a permitted use in that area and he has no hang-ups with that. Mr. Bowdoin mentioned hearing of other areas where churches has been denied because the neighbors did not want the church. He stated the church did not want to close on the property without approval and that he was aware the permit is only good for one year, if no activity has taken place, and must be re- applied for. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone present to speak for or against this special use permit. There was no one. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to grant the Special Use Permit for one year, after which they would have to re -apply for another special use permit, if no construc- tion activity has taken place. This would also be subject to the planning board's granting site plan approval. Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 2 Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote: 5 aye Motion carried. Special use permit was granted. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #707 - at the request of Herbert H. Redl, seeking a special use permit pursuant to Article IV, Section 422 paragraph 1 of the Town of Wappinge Zoning Ordinance to permit him to operate a motor vehicle repair business (Meineke Discount Mufflers) on property located on Route 9, being parcel #6156-02-753949. Representative: Herbert Redl, Pleasant Valley Mr. Redl stated they were applying for the special use permit. It was originally built as a garage and.repair shop, after that it was a Kowasaki sales and repair shop, and after that it was a Parkway Auto Wreckers, sale of new and used parts. Mrs. Waddle noted it would be along the same line as the previous businesses. Mr. Cortellino wanted to know what "other related parts and accessories" was. Mr. Redl mentioned shocks, mufflers, etc., small accessories. Mrs. Waddle was concerned if there would be any work done on engines, changing oil, etc. Mr. Redl stated there would not be. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against the special use permit. There was no one. Mr. Cortellino moved to grant the special use permit. Mr. Caballero seconded the motion. Mrs. Waddle noted the Conservation Advisory Council would like to see contours on the map and drainage flow. Mr. Cortellino amended his motion to include the recommendations of the Planning Board, the CAC, and restrict the site to muffler, shock and related changes. Vote: 5 ayes Motion carried, special use permit granted. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. # 713 - at the request of Richmor Aviation, Inc., seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 416.2 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for a sign on a parcel other than that parcel of the permitted use, in connection with premises located on New Hackensack Road, being parcel # 6259-03-340158, (N/F Linge Lumber). 05 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 3 Representative: Doris Hollack Ms. Hollack states she believed the issue is dead. They were notified today that Linge Lumber had sold the property to Dr. Heaney and they would probably be taking the sign down. She then brought up the letter from Richmor asking for a discussion on their sign on Route 376. She explained the situation. They put a $3500 sign up when they fixed the road. They had checked with Mr. Gunderud who checked with the town attorney who stated it was county jurisdiction, and Mr. Whitehead, who is the airport commissioner, who checked with the State and all the people he is supposed to check with and they all said go ahead. So they did and they put it up where all the other signs were. Since then she understands there has been a complaint as to the setback requirements. The sign is up if it were back 25 feet it could not be seen, where do they go from here? Mrs. Waddle mentioned applying for a variance. Mrs. Hollack stated Richmor felt they had gotten the necessary permission to put up the sign and should not have to apply for a variance. Mr. Landolfi asked where they were given permission to put up the sign. Mrs. Hollack stated she had to meet certain specifications from the center line of the road. Discussion, who did the checking, what the requirements were, etc. Mr. Gunderud explained the situation as he saw it. When she first called way back in the sping, he was under the impression that if the sign was on airport property (which it is) the Town of Wappinger did not have jurisdiction over the situation. Since that time, at the prying of one of the Town Board members the Town attorney had redefined his position to say that a private entity on the airport property would be subject to Town Zoning regulation. Mrs. Waddle requested a letter be written to the County attorney for his interpretation. If in his opinion, Richmor Aviation has to move their sign, please notify them to come in for a variance, and if not the topic will be dropped. Mrs. Hollack asked if Mr. Wing said the sign was okay, it could be left, and if he felt it should be back 25 feet, they would have to come in. Mrs. Waddle stated that was correct. Mrs. Russ would notify her of Mr. Wing's reply. She asked if appeal #713 was withdrawn. Mrs. Hollack stated it was. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #716 - at the request of Gina Petroleum, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 404.31 of the Townof Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for an expansion of legally non -conforming use greater that the fifty percent permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, in connection with premises located on Route 376, being parcel # 6259-04-840023. *AM- Representative: Robert Rahemba, Attorney Arthur Lieberman, President Gina Petroleum Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting -November 15,1983 Page 4 Mr. Rahemba stated they were asking for a variance to allow them to build a car wash on the premises, greater than the 50% expansion allowed by the ,,r, current zoning ordinance. He showed the board a map of the property and its uses in 1971, one of which was a go-cart track for races. There were a lot of buildings on the property so that what they are asking for is not really a change in the use of the property, it has been a commercial use in a residential area with extensive use before. What they were asking for is to put a car wash to the left of the building. There are already existing entrances off Rt. 376. Discussion - maps submitted. Mr. Rahemba stated it would be a 4 bay car wash. Mrs. Waddle asked what would be done to make the gas station blend in. Mr. Leiberman stated they were going to make the car wash look like the existing building and upgrade the gas station to make it look like the car wash. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was a full plan of the whole parcel. Mr. Leiberman stated they wanted to get an idea of the Zoning Boards approval before going to any extensive blueprints. Mrs. Waddle stated the board wanted to see how the whole plan would look. **M, Mr. Rahemba stated the property is currently showing a loss and his client (Gina Petroleum) does not want to spend a great deal of money if he is not going to get the approval. The board should have copies of the financial reports. They would like to upgrade the area and also make the property prof- itable. They are not going to change the character of the area. Mr. Caballero asked if the proper setbacks could be reached. Mr. Rahemba stated they could; it is a large piece of property. Mr. Cortellino stated he understood they were going to recycle their water but where were they getting their pickup water from? Mr. Rahemba stated it would come from a well. There should be a letter from Culligan. Mr. Caballero suggested putting the two buildings together. Mr. Rahemba stated they could not due to the location of and rules regarding storage tanks. Discussion, screening trees, surrounding area, size of parcel (3 acres) Mrs. Waddle read the D.C. Dept of Planning letter. on Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 5 Mr. Cortellino asked why 4 bays when carwashes with 2 or 3 bays seem to be sufficient. Mr. Rahemba stated the company that they would be purchasing the equipment from makes the equipment in sych a way as the equipment needed for the 3 bays handles the fourth bay as well. Mrs. Waddle asked how long the gas station had existed. (at least 25 years) Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anone who wished to speak for or against this variance. George Brannen, Rt. 376, He has been there as long as the station has. It has had a number of owners, been vacant a number of times. The traffic situation is very hazardous. It is also in a drainage problem area with wetlands across the street. He asked what the hardship was determined to be. Mrs. Waddle stated it was financial. Mr. Brannen stated the property had never been a paying property and he did not think the variance should be granted because a poor business decision had been made. The drainage from the carwash could contaminate the wetlands across the street. Ginny Stenaabugh, Rt. 376, next door to gas station. She is concerned about her water (well) being dried up. Mr. Cortellino explained the recycling situation. Mrs. Stenabaugh is concerned with the excess water drainage and the possibility of icy roads in the winter. She is also unclear about the screening. There are trees there but she can see the gas station clearly and can hear the cars screeching their brakes and tires which the screening does not help. Ed Skorynko, Dorett Drive, He agreed with Mr. Brannen's position on the financial hardship. He also questioned the water recycling and the effect on the neigh- boring wells. (possible contamination) The screening between the properties will be hard because many of the adjoining properties are 20-30 feet higher in elevation. The first use of the race track area, was a horse field and the building was originally used as a barn. The first use was a farm. He was also concerned with the kids being attracted to the area and the problems involved. He does not think the 4 bay carwash will improve the profitability - There is a series of curves and the increase of traffic would be a hazard. The amount of land covered by blacktop would hurt drainage. There are moving closer to the residential area and he sees no justification for the granting of the variance. Barbara Hansen, Rt. 376, She lives on the left hand side of the station. She put the screening in. Her main concern is the drainage. Her property is just a bit lower than the station and her yard is a swamp from May to July. She has lived there for 27 years, She has seen the station owners come and go, she has seen it vacant alot, and she would not like to see a 4 bay carwash vacant when she goes to sell her property, possibly in a few years. She has the same concerns as everyone else and she is definitely opposed to it. Zoning Board of Appeals, November 15, 1983 Page 6 Ed Hawksley, Chairman CAC, He would like to know where the Balt, chemicals, mud, etc., that builds up from washing vehicles over and over, will be discharged. 11%D,, The water table in the area is very shallow and he is concerned about contamin- ation. Mr. Leiberman stated they have a truck like a septic truck, which comes in on a regular basis, at least every 6 weeks, and pumps out the sediments. The truck owner has a license permit to dump it somewhere across the river in upstate New York. Mr. Cortellino noted the Culligan letter stated they would pump out the sludge, but what would happen with the items in the solution, such as salts? Mr. Rahemba stated Culligan comes by on a regular basis to check the chemical composition of the water. The City of Poughkeepsie uses this type system in their town garage to wash their trucks. Mr. Leiberman stated his land was flat, not wet in regard to drainage. He also stated that when he bought the station it was showing a profit but when the State came in to fix Rt. 376, they cut off his business for 5 months. He spent a year trying to build the business back up. Right now the property is being used as a dump.. They spend an average of $400.00 a month removing mattresses, iceboxes, etc. Mrs. Waddle stated she would like to bring in the conservation advisory council, the Town engineer, and the Health Department. Tabling the item would allow Mr. Leiberman time to bring an artist's rendering as well on how it will look with the screening etc. Mr. Caballero made a motion to table the item. Mr. Urciuoli asked which type car wash it was, self service or drive through? Mr. Leiberman stated it was a self service car wash. Mr. Urciuoli asked Mr. Leiberman if he was the sole stockholder of Gina Petroleum, Inc. Mr. Leiberman stated that he was. Mr. Caballero stated that there was a motion on the floor. Mr. would like the board to seriously consider rejecting this appeal because of the statement Mr. Leiberman made that it costs him $400 a month to remove matresses, etc. He does not think anyone in the area has seen any trucks go back there to pick yp something like that and he has never seen stuff like that in that area. Mrs. Waddle stated that was irrelevant to the case and she would not entertain any more discussion on the appeal. She thenstated she would entertain the motion to table this for more information. Mr. Urciuoli seconded the motion. *AW - Mr. Cortellino asked that the Highway Dept. be involved in this appea, and the NYSDOT. Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 7 Mrs. Waddle stated the item would be tabled until all the comments could be received and Mr. Leiberman come back with an artist's rendering. Vote: 5 aye Motion Carried, item was tabled. Discussion, when some action will be taken, letters of protest, etc. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. #717 - at the request of Mac George Automotive, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 422, NB Zone on the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for a building in an NB Zone (Neighborhood Business), with a fifty foot setback from a county road (All Angels Hill Road) where seventy-five feet is required, on property located on All Angels Hill Road, being parcels numbered 6357-03-190015 and 185004. Representative: none John Ardelli, 2 ParkHill Drive. He had the hearing a month ago. Discussion, he was denied last month and is re -appealing. Mr. Ardelli stated he had been there for 4 years, the property had only been rezoned 2 years ago. He is opposed to any commercial building. Mrs. Waddle stated he was still asking for a variance that was denied last month, and Mr. MacGeorge is not here to provide additional information. Mr. Gunderud explained that Mr. MacGeorge was asking for the variance because he was trying to stay as far away as possible from the residential area behind the property. There were a number of people at last months hearing that spoke against the variance and he felt they did not understand that granting the variance would keep it further away. He had a call from a neighbor who wanted to speak in favor of the variance. Mr. Ardelli wanted to know what he has proposed. Mrs. Waddle stated this is a permitted use in the NB Zone. What Mr. MacGeorge is proposing is a 50 foot setback istead of the 75 foot setback required, which would move the building 25 feet further from his property. Mr. Ardelli stated his objection was that he(MacGeorge) was denied, if any building is there, and you're telling me it is legitamate, its legal, yes, I want if further away; but what he wanted to tell the board is that number one his totally opposed, especially that type of building. Mr. Cortellino stated MacGeorge was not denied the building. Mrs. Waddle stated he was perfectly entitled to build on that piece of property. Mr. Ardelli asked if it had to be approved by the board and Dutchess County. 0n Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1984 Page 8 Mr. Cortellino explained that the only decision this variance makes is whether the building is closer or further from the residential area. Mr. Ardelli asked what happens next. Mrs. Waddle stated he goes to the planning board for site plan approval. Mr. Ardelli mentioned the 7 definitions of NB, #'s 6 & 7 is a gas station and repair shop which has to be specifically approved by Dutchess County. Why? His main concern was the area was rezoned without his knowing. He has been told it was put in the paper. He gets a notice that he can attend a variance to him it is after the fact. According to his attorney the area was rezoned for a desirable business, but then the deal fell through and the property remained commericial. His idea of desirable is not a repair shop. What can he do now. Mrs. Waddle stated they could no do anything about it. Al they (ZBA) could do is to administer the Zoning Ordinance the way it is written and give relief where we can within the law. Discussion, how the rezoning got passed. Mr. Gunderud stated Mr. MacGeorge will come before the ZBA for a special use permit. Discussion, permitted use, S.U.P. procedures, etc. NOW Mrs. Waddle stated the only thing that could be discussed tonight is the set- back. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to table the appeal. Mr. Landolfi seconded it. Vote: 5 ayes. Motion carried, the appeal was tabled. Mrs. Waddle stated the item would be tabled until the next month meeting and if Mr. MacGeirge did not show they would act anyway. She then read the next appeal. # 718 - at the request of Southland Corporation (7 -Eleven Food Stores) seeking variance of Article IV, Section 422 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance HB -1 Zone, to allow a building to be constructed at a lesser setback than the 75 foot requirement and to allow two uses, a 7 -Eleven Store and gasoline pumps on property located on the corner of Rt. 9 and Old Hopewell Road (former Shell Station site) being parcel # 6157-02-614569. Representative: Jack Railing, engineer Richard Bradley - 7 -Eleven Mrs. Waddle noted there was an existing building already and the applicant was going to tear that one down. rn Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 9 Mr. Railing stated the existing building is not satisfactory for their needs. He explained the variance needed was of the 75 foot setback from Old Hopewell. He showed the board a copy of the plans. Mr. Cortellino was concerned with dual uses. Discussion town uses, where building will be, entrance number of variances needed, S.U.P., discussed with planning board. Mrs. Waddle asked why the board did not refer the SU.P. to the planning board. Mrs. Russ explained they could not draw the plans until they knew where they were going to put the building (whether the variance would be granted or not) Mrs. Waddle read the letter from the Dutchess County Department of Planning. Discussion, principle uses, accessory use, variance requested. Mr. Bradley showed the board a coneptual drawing and explained what they would like to do. Mr. Landolfi brought up the signage. Mr. Bradley stated they had 3 sizes available. Mrs. Waddle stated a maximum of 25 square feet was permitted in the Town of Wappinger. She then asked if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against this variance. Edward Hawksley, CAC, concerned with the use of the gas pumps at that location and the storage tanks, He had just attended a conference and the NYSDEC's main concern at this time is with groundwater contamination due to leaky tanks. Mr. Bradley stated some of the existing tanks are fiberglass, which are non -corrosive, and the steel tanks will be tested by Shell Corporation. prior to the purchase, They will be removed at Shell's expense if they are leaky. Mr. Hawksley stated the fiberglass tanks were adequate but the steel tanks could develop a serious leak at any time and should be required to be removed as part of the SUP conditions. Mrs. Waddles stated they were not on the SUP yet, this was the variance, but they would take that into consideration. Mrs. Oliveri, Old Hopewell Rd., she owns the property just above the site and is concerned about the traffic on Old Hopewell Rd. and what their entrance/ exit effect will be. There is a lack of site distance, she also wants an EIS on the effect on the intersection. She is concerned with well contamination, Old Hopewell Rd. beining widened in future. There was determined to be 40 feet if the county widens Old Hopewell Rd. There is only 1 entrance on Old Hopewell. **MW Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 10 Discussion, permit approval, restrictions, traffic hazard, SUP process, etc. Mr. Caballero asked why the building could not be placed 75 feet back as required. Mr. Railing stated there were a couple of reasons. One is economic, they would have to cut back into the bank, which has quire a bit of rock. It would not be as aesthetically pleasing either. The other reasons are the prototype build- ing best fits the lot that way and the distance between the islands and the building. It is at the minimum setback to the rearyard. There would have to be severe regrading of the area. Mrs. Waddle asked if there wan asnyone else who wished to speak. There was no one. Discussion, setbacks, move building back, size of variance requiested (35 ft) entrances, two uses. Mr. Caballero asked Mr. Gunderud what the referral to D.C. Dept of Planning was in regard to on this variance, the setback or the two uses. Mr. Gunderud stated they were sent the whole package, the application which stated both the setback and the two uses. Mr. Caballero questioned the response from the county. Mrs. Russ stated the response from the county dealth with the SUP the variance had only been received on the 27th and was referred to the county on the 31st. Discussion, nothing received on the variance. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to table the requested variance. Mr. Caballero seconded it. Vote 5 ayes Motion carried, appeal for variance tabled. Discussion, response from the county. Mrs. Waddle asked that the SUP for 7-11 be referred to the Planning Board. Mr. Landolfi made a motion to refer the special use permit to the Planning Board. Mr. Caballero seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes. Motion carried , the special use permit was referred to the Planning Board. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal ;W #719- at the request of Richard & Margaret Brownell, seeking a variance of Article IV, Section 404.32 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to allow for an alteration (new roof) on legally non -conforming mobile home, on their property Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1984 Page 11 located on Booth Boulevard, being parcel 6056-03-466419. Representative: Mr. Brownell Mr. Brownell would like to put a peak roof on the mobile home to improve the property for the benefit of his neighbors more so than his own. He priced the cost of a flat roof, the same as is on the trailer now, and it was at least $800.00. The price of the peak roof will run him several thousand dollars. He is willing to spend the money to improve the property if the ZBA will give him the variance. He presented a letter signed by his neighbors, in favor of the variance. Margaret Brownell stated the one advantage they would receive would be to be able to put insulation in the peak. It is legal, it is a mobile home, but it is stationary so it can't just be pulled off the property. They are trying to improve the appearance. Greg Booth, Booth Boulevard had disucssed it with most of his neighbors, it is a very close community, on a dead end. The trailer has been there longer than most of the houses and will probably be there for years to come. The trailer would fit in more with the neighborhood if the new roof were put on. He is in favor of this variance. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was anyone else who wished to be heard, there was not. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to grant the requested variance. Mr. Urciuoli seconded the motion. Vote: 5 ayes. Motion carried, the variance was granted. Mrs. Waddle read the next appeal. # 700 - at the request of the Faith Bible Church, seeking a special use permit for a church and parish house to be located on property on Myers Corners Road. A spokesperson stated the site plan proposes the use of a church on a piece of property on Myers Corners Road, adjacent to the Myers Corners elementary school. There are 2 existing houses one existing barn. The barn will be reconstructed into a church along with a 12 x 22 addition to that structure for the purposes of the church. They have been before the Planning Board and they have a recommendation. Mrs. Russ stated a public hearing had not been set yet. Discussion, they should have a public hearing. The spokesperson asked that the people of the church asked that one of the houses be allowed to be used as income priducing since it would otherwise remain vacant. *AW Mr. Gunderud stated the planning board made the recommendation to use the house. The alternative is to sub -divide the property. Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1984 Page 12 Spokesperson - his only question is can they incorporate all that into one public hearing or two consecutive public hearings. Mrs. Waddle told him to talk to Mrs. Russ after the meeting. She then announced the public hearing would be set for the next meeting. She asked Mrs. Russ what was happening with the next one (Appeal #707) Mrs. Russ stated the recommendation from the Planning Board had just been received and a public hearing had to be set. Mrs. Waddle announced the public hearing would be set for Appeal #707 at the request of Dr. Desai, would be scheduled for next month. Mrs. Waddle stated there had been a request from Mr. McMann's attorney (#714) to adjourn the appeal until next month. Discussion, similarity between McMann and Faith Bible Church appeals, course to take. Mr. Cortellino made a motion to table the appeal until the next meeting. Mr. Landolfi seconded the motion. Vote 5 ayes. Motion carried, appeal was tabled. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was any other business to come before the board. Mr. MacGeorge had showed up late. He had been held up by an accident on Academy Street. Mrs. Waddle felt that was a good enough excuse to reopen the appeal. Representative: Mr. MacGeorge Mr. MacGeorge stated he had spoken to the people who were present at the previous meeting and explained the situation to them. They were no longer against the variance Mr. Landolfi stated he should have been here earlier, the guy right next door was pretty upset. Mr. Urciuoli made a motion to grant the variance. Mr. Cortellino seconded the motion. Vote: 4 aye 1 nay (Mr. Caballero) Motion carried, variance was granted. Mrs. Waddle asked if there was any other business to come before the board. There was none. Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting November 15, 1983 Page 13 The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Betty Ann Russ Secretary LC/fh on