1979-06-12The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town
of Wappinger was called to order on Tuesday, June 12th, 1979 at 8:00 p.m.,
at the Town Hall, Mill Street, Wappingers Falls, New York.
Members Present:
Joseph E. Landolfi, Chairman
Charles A. Cortellino
Donald Mc Millen
Howard Prager
Carol A. Waddle - arrived at 8:35 p.m.
Members Absent:
None
Others Present:
Hans R. Gunderud, Acting Bldg. Inspector/Zoning Admin.
Betty -Ann Russ, Secretary
The Chairman then asked the secretary if the appellants and
abutting property owners had been notified.
The secretary replied that the appellants and abutting property
owners according to the records in the Assessor's office had been
notified.
The Chairman then explained that it was the procedure of the
Board to hear all the cases, then take a short recess and reconvene
at which time the Board may or may not not render a decision on each
appeal. He added, however, in view of the number of persons present
regarding the application of Stanley Zablocki for a Special Use Permit
the Board would Change the order of the agenda to hear any additional
information before holding the public hearings.
Mr. Landolfi noted that the public hearing on the Special Use
Permit application was held last month at which time the Board received
all kinds of information and additionally had received written information
and facts regarding this case and if there was any new information or
facts which the Board did not have, these could be presented.
Mr. Jim O'Neil of 28 Widmer Road noted that he had a question
about why he did not receive a notice.
Mr. Landolfi explained that a legal notice was published in the
local paper and abutting notices were sent to the property owners
whose property touched the appellant's property and the Board wished
to address people who were not hear last month and had new information
to present as the Board eelsthey basically have all the facts.
Zoning Board of Appeals -2- June 12th, 1979
Mr. O'Neil noted that he was not present at the last meeting
and there were others here also and wanted the Board to bring these
people up to speed on what happened last month.
Mr. Landolfi replied that a medical clinic was a permitted
use and as long as the appellant adheres to all regulations he can put
the building in.
Mr. Cortellino noted that there were some twenty uses in
the Zoning Ordinance that are permitted in residential zones.
Mr. O'Neil then said there must have been modifications to the
Zoning Ordinance as when he purchased his property it was residential.
Mr. Cortellino replied that these uses were permitted by
zoning and this is the original ordinance.
Mr. Mc Millen added that there are a number of uses permitted
by Special Use Permit.
Mr. O'Neil asked why there were professional use and why do
they have to be in a one family residential area.
Mr. Cortellino replied that it was a one family zone.
Mr. Mc Millen commented that it was not exclusively residential
as there are permitted special uses.
Mr. Landolfi noted that the application before the Board is
very allowable for it to go in and the only thing the Board can
do is to place restrictions such as hours of operation, buffering,
parking etc. He added that he had also checked with the Town
Attorney and was told we could not stop this but that the appellant
would have to meet all the requirements and conditions to get a
building permit.
Mr. O'Neil again noted that he thought this was a one family
residential area.
Mr. Mc Millen then commented that the Town Board would be holding
a public hearing on June 26th on the new ordinance and these type uses
are also permitted and if the people object to these uses in a residential
zone they should attend this meeting and voice their objections that
they do not want these uses.
Mr. O'Neil commented that he thought there should be better
notice to the residents.
Zoning Board of Appeals -3- June 12th, 1979
Mr. Landolfi replied that the public hearing on this was held
last month and a legal notice was submitted and printed in the paper
in addition to the abutting property owners being notified these being
the properties whose boundary lines touch the Zablocki parcel and
the Board got a lot of facts at the last meeting and if there are
any additional facts they will be heard.
Mr. O'Neil responded that he realized that the Board was bound
by law but he wanted an explanation.
Mr. Landolfi noted that at the public hearing many neighbors
presented facts and letters were submitted and additionally a
petition was received.
Mr. Cortellino then commented that people are concerned about
the clinic on Widmer Road where were they and why were they not
concerned when a medical clinic was proposed to go in on New Hackensack
Road and one should read the legals all the time as it maybe in
your area next.
Robert Clausen of Widmer Road noted that they do not want a
clinic and the people want to know what kind of clinic.
Mr. Landolfi replied that it is a medical clinic for four
medical doctors.
Mr. Clausen vehemently commented what does this mean, it could
be a dope, alcohol or sex clinic.
Mr. J.C. Lawrence, P.E. noted that he represented the owner
Mr. Stanley Zablocki who was also present tonight.
Mr. Landolfi noted that there has been concerns about what
you are proposing and it was the Board's understanding that there
would be offices for four medical doctors.
Mr. Zablocki commented that he felt the term clinic aggravates
everyone and this is not what he is proposing, it will be office
space for licensed medical doctors such as the medical group
on Route 376 in Hopewell Junction and that so far they have
an eye doctor and an internist in general practice lined up.
He added that the building will blend in with the area and that
he can understand the people as he doesn't like the word clinic
and thought this should be changed as it reminds him of Bellvue
Hospital and this is not at all the type use they propose.
Zoning Board of Appeals -4- June 12th, 1979
Mr. Landolfi then asked Mr. Zablocki why he chose this
particular location.
Mr. Zablocki replied that he thought about this and thought it was
a good location and he invested in the property although it could
have been subdivided and built two houses and this would have added
to the school system and felt that people in the area were looking
for doctors in the area and this was a permitted use.
Mr. O'Neil replied that the neighbors didn't object to
additional houses.
Mr. Paul Ganci then came before the Board and noted that
his parents are the abutting property owners and would like to
discuss several items with the Board. Mr. Ganci's concerns were
expressed in the following letter which he submitted to the
Board.
June 11, 1979
conditions for Granting a Special Use Permit
to Mr. S. Zablocki, Widmer Road
433 1. Submit detailed plans and specifications to the Town
Engineer and Highway Superintendent for approval of a storm
sewer system that will deposit water runoff into the Town
Storm Sewer System on Widmer Road.
433.012 2. Submit to the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval plans
that prvide for adequate side yard screening. The plan should
provide for maintaining any existing trees in a 15 -foot strip
and providing an additional evergreen screen a minimum of 6
feet high and 12 feet wide. The evergreens shall be installed
and maintained with a triangular spacing with a maximum distance
of 12 feet between the trees.
434.012 3. Establish a 50 -foot side yard set back.
434.014
434.013 4. Submit for approval to the Town Engineer a detailed site
lighting plan that will be designed to eliminate any glare
to adjoining properties.
434.014 5. Submit for approval to the Highway Superintendent a plan
for highway entrance and exit.
434.011 6. Prohibit utilizing the facility for inpatient care and/or
residence type care centers, such as nursing homes or re-
Zoning Board of Appeals -5- June 12th, 1979
habilitation clinics. The facility shall be used as an
outpatient care center by no more than four physicians and eight
employees who will treat outpatients during the hours of
7:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.
437 7. If the facility remains vacant or incomplete for any
12 -month period, the special use permit will be cancelled.
Mr. Ganci then thanked the Board for their consideration of
these requests.
The Board advised that many of these requests are standard
conditions of approval.
The Board then asked if there were any other questions or comments.
Mr. Barney Evangelista of Widmer Road asked how many people
would be expected to come in and out.
Mr. Landolfi replied that this would depend upon the hours
which the Board will set.
Mr. Evangelista noted that he has a pole in his yard that
has been hit twice and felt that this use will increase the
traffic up to 25 percent per day as a ball park figure.
Mr. Fred Slater, Jr. commented that he felt that approving this
would create a precedent and didn't think these uses should go in
on Widmer Road and didn't want to see this.
Mr. Mc Millen then explained again that these were permitted
uses in the ordinance and if people didn't want them they should
make the Town Board aware of their feelings on June 26th at which
time the Town Board will be holding a public hearing on the
proposed zoning ordinance.
Mr. Lawrence then indicated that the building would be one story
in the front and two stories in the back and that 35 feet was the
maximum height limit.
Mr. O'Neil commented that it had been indicated that there
would be an internist and an eye doctor, what would the others be?
Mrs. Waddle noted that there was no requirement that these
had to be identified.
Mr. Cortellino added that they could be any licensed medical
doctor.
Zoning Board of Appeals -6- June 12th, 1979
Mr. Ganci then asked that in view of the questions raised
would it be possible to postpone the decision until the Engineer
to. the Town makes recommendations.
Mr. Landolfi replied that this would be handled as others
as the conditions of approval such as Engineer's approval would
have to be met prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The Board asked if there were any further comments or
additional facts.
There were no further comments and discussion was closed at
8:55 P.M.
Mr. Landolfi noted that he had made the decision to take
this item first due to the number of persons present and the
Board would now return to the order of the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Appeal #k434, at the request of Dr. Daniel J. Hannigan, seeking
a variance of Section 422, subparagraph 4 of the Town of Wappinger
Zoning Ordinance, to permit the erection of a free-standing sign
to be located at a lesser setback than required on property located
on Myers Corners Road, in the Town of Wappinger.
The Chairman read the legal notice.
Mr. M. Donald Lane, Registered Architect, was present in behalf
of Dr. Hannigan.
Mr. Lane noted that he did not know what else he could offer
other then what was indicated on the forms and that the doctor
wanted a small innocuous sign as the property is screened on one side
by trees and on the other side is a house.
Mr. Landolfi asked what hours the sign would be lite.
Mr. Lane replied that it would be a 40 watt bulb and they
would agree to have it on during the hours of operation in
accordance with the office hours.
Mr. Landolfi noted that the Board had received the recommendation
of the Dutchess County Department of Planning which suggested a
%0+ modification on the setback request. (A copy of said recommendation
is on file.)
Zoning Board of Appeals
-7-
June 12th, 1979
Mr. Cortellino asked how many new people would go to the
office due to the sign.
Mr. Lane replied that ha wouldn't be able to guess at
that, they wanted a small sign to identify it and would be
on a piece of masonary, not guady and would mark the entrance.
Mr. Lamdolfi commented did people really need the sign as
Dr. Hannigan is very well known in the area and how would the
sign add or delete.
Mr. Lane replied that they felt a sign was necessary.
Mr. Mc Millen indicated that he objected to having the
sign two feet off the road and thought that the edge of the road
to the parking lot about 20 feet was more reasonable.
Mr. Cortellino commented that he felt having the sign
on the edge of the road would be hazardous.
Mr. Mc Millen added that he felt 18 feet off the road would
be reasonable but didn't want to see concrete two feet off the
road and had this been considered.
Mr. Lane replied that they wanted something which would
identify the location.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone present who wished
to be heard for or against the Appeal.
No one present wished to be heard.
The hearing was closed at 9:00 p.m.
Appeal # 435, at the request of Manfred & Blossom Birkenbach,
d.b.a. - The Unicorn Restaurant, seeking variances of Section 423,
Signs, of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit one
free-standing sign at a lesser setback than required on property
located on Old Route 9 and Route 9, formerly known as "Forest Haus",
the Town of Wappinger.
The Chairman read the legal notice.
Manfred and Blossom Birkenbach were present for the Appeal.
Mr. Birekenbach noted that they only wanted a variance for the
free-standing sign on new Route 9 and that it would be in the same
spot only higher and felt that it would be in keeping with the
existing signs and added that the building was setback quite a bit
in
Zoning Board of Appeals
June 12th, 1979
from new Route 9 as the restaurant was built before this road
went in.
Mr. Cortellino noted that the wooden entrance off Route 9
would prevent a fire truck from getting under it and suggested
that the Hughsonville Fire Company be contacted.
Mrs. Waddle noted that they could get in touch with
Chief Waddle about this.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone who wished to
be heard for or against the Appeal.
No one present wished to be heard.
The hearing was closed at 9:05 p.m.
Appeal # 436, at the request of Roger C. Townsend, seeking a
Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 421, Permitted Accessory Uses in
Residential Districts, Subparagraph A. of the Town of Wappinger Zoning
Ordinance, to permit him to establish an insurance office in his home
located on the corner of Daisy Lane and New Hackensack Road, being
2 Daisy Lane, in the Town of Wappinger.
The Chairman read the legal notice.
Mr. Townsend was present.
Mr. Cortellino asked Mr. Townsend what type of broker he
was.
Mr. Townsend replied general and that normally people don't
come to the home that it is really space for clerical work and
that he was presently located on Route 9 in the Fishkill Mall
but they were sending people to Poughkeepsie and that there really
would not be any client traffic with the exception of an occasional
customer as most of the work is done outside and it is for a girl
to answer the phone and to do clerical work and did not think
there is a traffic problem.
Mr. Cortellino noted that the Highway Superintendent was
concerned about the possibility of cars backing out and asked
how many cars Mr. Townsend had.
Mr. Townsend replied two cars.
-+
Mrs. Waddle noted that the concern was that cars would back
out on the road and this is on the corner of New Hackensack Road
Zoning Board of Appeals -9- June 12th, 1979
which is heavily travelled.
Mr. Townsend replied that he did not forsee a problem as
there is an area to turn around and then pull out.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present who wished
to be heard for or against the Appeal.
No one present wished to be heard.
The hearing was closed at 9:10 p.m.
Appeal # 437, at the request of Rao R. Tummala, seeking a
variance of Section 411.07 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to
permit the construction of a single-family dwelling on a lot located
on Dugan Lane, in the Town of Wappinger. Said property having no frontage
on a street or highway as defined by Section 280A of the Town Law.
The Chairman read the legal notice.
Mr. Rao Tummala and Mr. Robert Scarpelli, Mr. Rao's builder,
were present.
Mr. Cortellino asked Mr. Tummala if he was aware that there
is no snow plowing, no school bus pick-up,»etc. on a private road.
Mr. Landolfi noted that there may also be a problem with
deliveries such as oil.
Mr. Scarpelli then presented the Board with a copy of the
survey of the property.
Mr. Landolfi noted that the Board just wanted to point these
items out.
Mr. Scarpelli then asked the Board if they wished to see the
house plans.
The Board indicated that this would not be necessary.
Mr. Ed Ziherl then came forward and noted that he lived on
Locust Drive and he used Martin Drive and Shady Brook Lane for access
and lived across the street from the back of this property. He added
that he and Mr. Utter plow the road in the Winter to Shady Brook and
also plow out to Pine Ridge and didn't see any problem if Mr. Tummala
came out to Martin Drive and that he had offered to share the plowing
costs but they were not concerned about this. He added that the oil truck,'
come in and service our properties and didn't think there would be a
problem and had no objection to the variance being granted.
Zoning Board of Appeals -10- June 12th, 1979
Mr. Tummala then asked when he could expect to hear a decision.
The Board advised that they have 60 days to act and that
Mr. Tummala could check with the office in the morning or stay
and wait for the Board's decision.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone present who wished
to be heard.
No one present wished to be heard.
The hearing was closed at 9:20 p.m.
Appeal # 438, at the request of Daniel V. Cummings, seeking a
variance of Section 414.05 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to
permit him to erect an eight foot stockade fence on his property
located on 53 Martin Drive, in the Town of Wappinger.
The Chairman read the legal notice.
Mr. Daniel V. Cummings was present.
Mr. Landolfi noted that he had looked at the property and asked
if the fence would solve the problem.
Mr. Cummings replied that they have a pool and are concerned as
children have climbed the present fence and when grading work was done
on Town property this disturbed their privacy.
The Chairman then asked if there was anyone present who
wished to be heard.
No one present wished to be heard.
The hearing was closed at 9:25 p.m.
With regard to Appeal # 434, at the request of Dr. Daniel J.
Hannigan, a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Cortellino,
to grant a variance to permit the sign to be setback 16 feet from the
edge of the road.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
With regard to Appeal # 435, at the request of Manfred and
6W Blossom Birkenbach, a motion was made by Mr. Cortellino, seconded
by Mrs. Waddle to grant the variance.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
Zoning Board of Appeals -11- June 12th, 1979
With regard to Appeal #k 436, at the request of Roger C. Townsend,
a motion was made by Mr. Prager, seconded by Mr. Cortellino, to
grant the Special Use Permit with the following conditions:
1. There shall be no more than two non-resident employees.
2. The Zoning Board of Appeals reserves the right to review
the application for a period of three years with regard to
the adequacy of the parking area as the Highway Superintendent
has expressed a concern.
3. No signs on the premises shall be permitted.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
With regard to Appeal #k 437, at the request of Rao R. Tummala,
a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Cortellino, that
the requested be granted.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
With regard to Appeal ## 438, at the request of Daniel V. Cummings,
a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Mc Millen, to
grant a variance to permit an eight foot high stockade fence from
the back of the house to the back property line on the side facing
the right-of-way open side.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
With regard to Appeal ## 433, at the request of Stanley Zablocki,
a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Prager, to grant
a Special Use Permit with the following conditions:
1. Detailed drainage plans must be approved by the Engineer
to the Town prior to the issuance of a building permit.
2. Approval of the Dutchess County Department of Health
on water supply and sewage disposal shall be obtained prior
to the issuance of a building permit.
3. Downstream drainage fee of $ .15 a square foot for newly
constructed roofed areas and areas covered by impervious material
shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit.
4. Driveway approval must be obtained from the Town of Wappinger
Highway Superintendent prior to the issuance of a building permit.
5. A ten foot strip along the entire front of the property
shall be deeded to the Town for highway purposes prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
6. Both driveways indicated on the site plan must be blacktopped
for a distance of twenty-six feet in from the edge of the existing
Widmer Road.
7. Any signs to be located on the property must be in conformance
with the requirements of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance
unless a variance is applied for and obtained.
Zoning Board of Appeals -12-
June 12th, 1979
B. Existing trees along the property lines shall remain. Buffer
of trees which will retain foliage (i.e.: evergreens) shall be
required along the property lines. Placement of such trees shall
be in accordance with the recommendations of the Engineer to the
Town.
9. Use of the building to be constructed is restricted to
four medical offices only.
10. Any change of these conditions would require an amendment
to the Special Use Permit. Violations of said conditions could
result in revocation of the Special Use Permit.
11. Should tenancy for the medical office be unavailable, use
of the property must revert back to residential use pursuant
to Section 421 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance unless
other permitted uses by this section by Special Use Permit be
applied for and granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals in accordance
with the provisions of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance.
12. Hours of operation shall be 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m.,
Monday thru Saturday.
13. A copy of the building plans shall be supplied to the
New Hackensack Fire Company to insure compliance with the
Town of Wappinger Fire Prevention Law.
14. With regard to x-ray equipment, any other radiation, etc.
must conform with the requirements of the Dutchess County Department
of Health and the New York State Building Code.
15. The medical clinic shall not be utilized for any inpatient
care and/or residence type care centers, such as nursing homes
or rehabilitation clinics.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
With regard to the letter submitted by Harry Shukat, the
Board directed the secretary to send a letter to him advising him that
the Board abides by their previous decision and do not see a hardship.
A motion was then made by Mr. Cortellino, seconded by Mrs. Waddle,
to adjourn.
Motion Was Unanimously Carried
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
i
(Mrs.) etty-Ann Russ, Secretary
br
UNAPPROVED
,ecLivrl 41 e . scneau� o e .iaence--Z-One use L40 -DIU_1uIIIV
or premises shall be used, and no building or group of buildings, or
part of a building or structure, shall be erected, constructed, enlarge,
altered, arranged or designed to be used, in whole or in part, except
for one or more of the uses set forth below. Only those uses
{ specifically listed as being permitted in a specific district shall
be permitted in that district. A use, or series of uses, marked with
an asterisk(*) is subject to the additional standards and procedure
not forth in Section 430, for uses requiring special permits.
Permitted Principal Uses in Residential Districts
1. One single -family dwelling per lot, not to include
mobile homes or house trailers.
2. A 2 or more family dwelling* in any RD-20 District,
and, in any RD-20 District, a mobile home park or addition thereto.
The number of dwellings or the number of mobile homes in a mobile
home park, shall not exceed the number of single -family dwellings
that would be permitted in a particular area or in a mobile home
park site, based upon the required minimum lot size of the district
within which the 2 or more family dwelling or mobile home park site
lies. All structures designed, used, or to be used for 2 or more
dwellings and all permitted mobile home parks, as defined in this
Ordinance, shall meet the requirements of site plan review as described
in Section 440 of this Ordinance. Each structure shall be located
on a lot meeting the requirements of Section 422, except that, in
any RD District, two or more family structures* may be constructed at
a density no greater than 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit provided:
a. The land upon which such dwelling units are to be
constructed shall be at least 10 acres in extent.
b. Public or community water and sewer facilities,
meeting the requirements of the Dutchess County Health Department and
the New York State Health Department are provided for each dwelling E'
unit.
c. The off-street parking requirements in Section 454
of this Ordinance and any other pertinent requirements of this
Ordinance are met.
d. The usable open space surrounding the dwelling
units is dedicated as recreation and open space for the inhabitants
of the proposed dwelling units.
e. The entire development, and each principal and
accessory use within it, shall meet the yard requirements of the RD -40
District, or each yard shall be of a depth equal to the.height of the
tallest structure, within the development, whichever is greatest, and
no structure containing dwelling units shall be closer to another
structure than a distance equal to the average of the heights of the
two structures.
3. Farm use, farm produce stand*, nursery* and green
house*, as defined in this Ordinanee,.provided that no unenclosed
storage of manure, or odor or dust producing substance shall be
permitted within one hundred (100) feet of any street or residential
property line.
PAGE 19
/ 4. Churen-, otner piece or worsnipx, c:Cntct_ciy--.
5. Public School.
6. College*, library*, museum*.
7. Religious and charitable institutions*, not including
institutions for the mentally -ill or insane.
B. Governmental uses.
9. Public and private.parla, reservations and recreation
facilities, but not including commercial facilities.
10. Public water supply and sewage disposal systems and
facilities*.
11. Common facilities and/or systems for private water
supply and sewage disposal*,
12. Tourist home* or boarding house*..
13. Conversion of an existing dwelling* built prior to
the adoption of this Ordinance and having a usable floor area of.not
less than 3,000 square feet for two-family or multi -family residence,
or other use as permitted in the District, provided each dwelling unit
produced from such conversion shall have at least 600 square feet of
usable floor area, and off-street parking requirements, as well as all
other requirements, of this Ordinance are met*.
14. Private* and parochial, schools*.
15. Hospital*, nursing*, or convalescent home*, medical
clinic*.
16. Day nursery* or nursery school*.
17. Riding academies*, stables*, veterinarian offices*,
hospitals*, and dog kennels*, only when located on ten or more acres
of land.
18. Private camps for seasonal residence only*.
19. Private non-profit membership club* or corporation*.
20. Utility transmission lines and unit sub -stations,
provided that;
a. the location, construction and right-of-way of any
transmission line shall be such as to prevent hazard to the public and
surrounding property: t
b. gas booster stations shall be located on a site no Y
less than l acre in area and having no dimension less than 100 feet;
C. a utility sub -station shall be located on a lot not
less than 10,000 square feet in area. There shall be suitable fencing
to protect the public, and enough landscaping and planting to effectively
screen the sub -station from surrounding property. Yard setbacks of the
district in which located shall be met. In addition, there shall be
adequate off-street parking area for maintenance, service, or other
vehicles, but in no case less than two parlc:ing spaces.
d. Minor structures, such as hydrants, telephone or
light poles, or similar equipment, shall not be subject to these regulations.
21. Extraction of stone, clay, sand and gravel, or other
natural resource from the ground, including the processing of such
resource, in accordance with the requirements of Section 439.01.
L
PAGE 20