Loading...
1979-08-14The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wappinger was held on Tuesday, August 14th, 1979 at 8:00 p.m., at the Town Hall, Mill Street, Wappingers Falls, New York. Members Present: Joseph E. Landolfi, Chairman Donald Mc Millen Howard Prager Carol A. Waddle Members Absent: Charles A. Cortellino Others Present: Hans R. Gunderud, 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 render a decision on each appeal. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Appeal #k 441, at the request of Heidimarie Geraci, seeking a variance of Section 421, permitted accessory uses, paragraph 2 - customary home occupations of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit the sale of televisions and stereo equipment from her home located on 28 Baldwin Drive, in the Town of Wappinger. The Chairman read the legal notice. Mr. Peter Geraci, husband of Heidimarie Geraci, who applied for the variance, was present in her behalf. Mr. Landolfi noted that he was out to see the property last night and added that the Board had received an anonymous letter which was not signed. Zoning Board of Appeals -2- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Landolfi then read the following letter: Note: this letter is typed as it was written. Aug. 10, 1979 Dear Sir; Mr. & Mrs. Peter Gerica 28 Baldwin Drive Wappingers Falls NY. 12590 Are Asking you for A perment to sell T.V., radio, Hi Fi set ect. I Am asking you to Refuse Mr. Gerica A perment for reason, ##1. Residential zoned Area. 2. Inudegmte parking. 3. Constant Traffica Seven Days A Week and Holidays. 4. Children At Play I'm very upset with the traffic due to children At play. Thank You, Upset Parent Mr. Landolfi then asked how many days a week was the business operated. Mr. Geraci replied that it was strictly by appointment only, that ads are placed in the Pennysaver or Poughkeepsie Journal, that the company places the ads and that there are maybe 4 to 7 cars a week and some weeks we have no one. Mrs. Waddle then asked about how long they have been engaged in business. Mr. Geraci replied that they had been until they were notified and with warranties would like to until this is settled. Mrs. Waddle then asked if the business was the primary source of income. Mr. Geraci replied no. Zoning Board of Appeals -3- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Prager then asked about parking. Mr. Geraci replied that they usually park in the driveway which can hold up to five cars comfortably and that he has two passenger vehicles but can accomodate four other vehicles. Mr. Landolfi then asked if there was any specific evidence of a business. Mr. Geraci commented that there were no signs posted to indicate there was a business and then presented the Board with a petition signed by 47 residents of the development, which covered everyone on Baldwin except the people who made the complaint and that most of the people were not even aware that we were conducting a business. The petition was then received and placed on file. Mr. Mc Millen then asked Mr. Geraci how they took the orders. Mr. Geraci replied that an ad is placed, people then call and ask for information and if they are interested they make an appointment to see the merchandise and that during working hours his wife takes care of it. Mr. Mc Millen noted that his big concern was not with traffic but that this was not a permitted use and it might be something else if merchandise was not being handled or stored in the house. Mr. Geraci noted that he had been doing this since before Christmas and was not aware he was breaking any rules. Mr. McMillen noted that it was still a retail business. Mr. Geraci added that this type of business was very flexible and that he could operate on any fair and equitable conditions a permit would impose and that it was a pin money type of operation and certain hours or days as it is that flexible a business. Mrs. Waddle then asked about the number of televisions. Mr. Geraci replied about 15 tvs a month, on holiday maybe more, but got about 15 tvs every 25 to 30 days. A unidentified speaker then noted that he lived two houses down from Mr. Geraci and had lived there for 3� years and did not feel the business was a problem, there are other neighbors here who feel the same way, didn't think it was a big deal, it is a very Zoning Board of Appeals -4- August 14th, 1979 simple operation, there is no traffic problem, the people doing this complaint is based on vindictiveness, and I am very much in support of Mr. Geraci. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone else present who wished to speak in favor of the Appeal. Mr. Joe Ryan of 34 Baldwin Drive commented that as far as problem with traffic he did not feel at all threatened and as far as the retail business felt that there was a problem with the letter of the law but also consider the spirit of the law, it is a little business and he had no worry about children and did not feel there was a danger to the children and was in favor of Mr. Geraci's appeal. Mr. George Statz of 32 Baldwin Drive noted that he was a retired policeman and was very familar with traffic, there is no traffic problem and that the complaint against the business was absurd. Mr. Ernest Galderisi of 3 Mac Intosh Lane added that there was no problem with traffic and felt it was a shame that this man (Mr. Geraci) is being taken for a ride. A Mr. Assanti? noted that he had no objection. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone present who wished to be heard for or against the Appeal. No one else present wished to be heard. The hearing was closed at 8;17 p. m. Appeal # 442, at the request of Ronald Satallante, seeking a variance of Section 421, paragraph 17 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance and the July 12th, 1977 interpretation of the Zoning Board of Appeals, to permit the keeping of two horses on his property located on 37 Park Hill Drive, being lot 54 of the Moccasin Hill Subdivision, in the Town of Wappinger. The Chairman read the legal notice. Mr. Satallante was present for the Appeal. Zoning Board of Appeals -5- August 14th, 1979 ,w Mr. Prager asked Uow large the property was. Mr. Satallante replied that it wa`s a little over an acre. Mr. Landolfi asked Mr. Satallante if he was aware of the restrictions regarding horses. Mr. Satallante replied that there were other horses in the area in addition to llamas in the neighborhood. He added that he had knocked on doors and people had signed a petition in favor and that he boards the horses across the road and are on tht prpperty sometimes. Mr. Landolfi noted that there is a law on the books regarding horses. Mr.Mc Millen added that it does require ten acres. Mr. Satallante noted that he boards the horses across the road but was told they could not be on the property at all. Mrs. Waddle commented that he could not be stopped from riding. Mr. Satallante commented that he boards across the road and some of the board members had seen his place and it does not stand out or ruin the neighborhood and keeps the horses, across the road where they are most of the time and that once or twice a week they are kept on the property and has a little corral and that the horses will be moved in another month for the winter and that they are fed at the stable and no one minds. Mr. Landolfi noted that the issue is not that neighbors are against it, stabling or keeping overnight requires ten acres. Mrs. Waddle noted that it could become a permanent thing then a shed goes up. Mrs. Satallante commented that someone complained about her horses on the property, didn't like the idea of horses being here then she was told that they could not even stop on the property for a drink and that she was paying taxes and can't have the horses stop on the property and that she could not have the horses there at all. Mr. Mc Millen replied that the horses could be ridden but could not stay overnight on the property. Mrs. Waddle added that horses could not be stabled but could be on the property as long as they are brought back where they are boarded at night. Mrs. Satallante added that the neighbors did not mind. Zoning Board of Appeals -6- August 14th, 1979 Mrs. Waddle added that the Satallantes would get a letter as the horses are not there overnight and then they have no problem. Mr. Satall ante noted that he understands that the horses can be on the property as long as he brings back each night. 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 8:27 p.m. Appeal # 443, at the request of Julia Ann Robison, seeking an amended Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 421, Permitted Principal Uses, Paragraph 16 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance to permit an employee and to increase the occupancy of the existing day nursery from seven children to twelve children in ;attendance at any one time in her residence located on 8 Martin Drive, in the Town of Wappinger, being parcel..# 6258702-955960. The Chairman read the legal notice., Mrs. Julia Ann Robison was present. Mr. Millen noted that permit says 12 from the Board of Health. Mr. Prager asked .about fire Mr. Gutderud commented that the property on June 5th, 1979. inspection of the premises. the fire company inspected Mr. Landolfi then asked about access to the swimming pool. Mrs. Robison replied that the play area has a gate which is locked and the children cannot get to the pool. The Chairman then aske4.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 8:30 p.m. Appeal # 444, at the request of Art -Tex Petroleum, Inc., seeking variances of Section 423 -District LB, Permitted Accessory Uses, Paragraph B of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit the placement of a 36" x 72" non -illuminated sign on an existing light pole approximately 20 feet from the edge of Myers Corners Road, at the southeasterly corner of property located on De Garmo Hills Road and Myers Corners Road, in the Town of Wappinger, being parcel # 6258-02- 730572. The Chairman read the legal notice. Zoning Board of Appeals -7- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Art Liberman was present for the Appeal. Mr. Prager asked if there would be any disadvantage if the sign was put where the fuel prices are presently located. Mr. Liberman replied that the sign used to be up for tune ups and that a variance had been obtained for the Exxon sign and that he did not want to block the Stop sign and didn't think it would be a good idea to put it on the corner. Mr. Mc Millen asked about if it would be for diesel fuel, 3' by 31. Mr. Liberman commented it did not stand out, the sign did help. Mr. Mc Millen commented that he noticed the diesal on the PUMPS* Mr. Landolfi then asked if the sign would bring in that much additional business. Mr. Mc Millen noted that the sign was down for a time, did it decrease. Mr. Liberman replied that it did not increase and the sign could be smaller if the Board wanted. Mr. Mc Millen added that everyone looks at the pricing signs. Mr. Liberman noted that he would like to use the small wooden sign and didn't want to hang anything more on the sign. The Board and Mr. Liberman discussed the proposed location of the sign. 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 8:35 P.m. Appeal # 445, at the request of Stanley Porco, dba: Villa Borghese, seeking a variance pursuant to Section 544.1.1 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit the expansion of a non -conforming -' use, being a restaurant located on Widmer Road, in the Town of Wappinger, being parcel # 6158-02-880530. The Chairman read the legal notice. Mr. Stanley Porco and Mr. Kenneth C. Russ of Richard G. Barger, P.E. & L.S.'s office, were present. Zoning Board of Appeals -8- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Prager asked if the work would be done in the existing building or would there be additions. Mr. Russ replied yes that it was more of closing in what is there, 6,800 square feet is there. Mr. Mc Millen commented that he was not sure that the patio area could be counted. Mr. Russ replied that if it was discounted they could cut down on the lounge as they want to square up the building. Mr. Mc Millen mentioned 1,400 square feet. Mr. Russ noted that they could cut 700 square foot if it has to be done as the ordinance allows fifty percent but they had made a note on the map that it does include the patio area and they would have to adjust the plan to whatever the Board would allow. He also added that if the variance was granted site plan approval would have to obtained from the Planning Board. 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 8;40 p.m. Appeal # 446, at the request of Edward and Joan Sailer, seeking a variance of Section 412.01 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit the averaging of lot sizes on proposed five lot subdivision of property located off Lake Oniad Drive and Section 422 - Schedule of Residence District Standards of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, being parcels # 6257-01-430920 and 6257-02-513975, in the Town of Wappinger. The Chairman read the legal notice. Mr. Edward Sailer and Mr. Karl Puttlitz of the Lake Oniad Lot Owners Association were present. Mr. Sailer noted that the property was made up of two parcels, lots of Lake Oniad Lot Owners Association and Sailer and would like to provide a brief history as about three years ago he (Mr. Sailer) started negotiations on the swap of lands and about 21p years ago went to the Planning Board and just got preliminary, and saw no reason why we could not go ahead with our plans and that two lots would be non -conforming as they would be under 20,000 square feet but felt this was the most attractive layout. Mr. Puttlitz noted that they were a committee of 70 families Zoning Board of Appeals -9- August 14th, 1979 and it was not easy to arrive at a contract and,it took 2� years to come up with this layout and any change would require further negotiations and they may not even reach another agreement and this would be a hardship. Mr. Mc Millen noted that the property had sewer service and there were no septics involved and there was also central water. Mr. Sailer noted that for 16 years the Planning Board had allowed the interpretation on averaging until they were recently advised by the Attorney to the Town that this provision no longer existed. Mr. Mc Millen noted that up to two years ago the Planning Board had full authority to do this. Mr. Sailer added that up to then they did not feel that variances were necessary. Mr. Puttlitz added at no time were we given the impression that variances were necessary and then there was a letter from the Attorney and now we are required to get a variance. Mr. Landolfi noted that there had been changes to the ordinance. Mr. Puttlitz added that averaging the lot sizes was okay up until the last few months. Mr. Sailer added that the Planning Board generally granted averaging except on small two lot subdivision but that a question arose on the five lot subdivision, two or thirty lots where is the cut off, the Board then wrote the Attorney who advised that averaging was no longer permitted. Mr. Puttlitz noted that they had staked out the two smaller lots to see if a house could be located within the requirements and found that with an average size house it looks proper and appeared to be no problem. Mr. Mc Millen noted that the other lots point to the pond, and could this be included. Mr. Sailer noted that there was roughly 120,000 square feet and that they would have been allowed to go to 15,000 square feet. Mr. Mc Millen then asked if one of the other previously subdivided lots could be incorporated. Mr. Sailer replied that this would mean losing a building lot and felt that this layout presented is considerably nicer. Mr. Mc Millen asked how much of the pond is taken up on the lots. Zoning Board of Appeals -10- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Sailer replied that this was indicated on the map. Mr. Mc Millen added that he did not see a problem as there was central water and sewer. 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 8:50 p.m. Appeal # 447, at the request of Cynthia Lynch, dba: Neighborhood Playmates Pre-school Center, seeking a Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 421, Permitted Principal Uses, paragraph 16 and and Section 423, District HB -1, paragraph 10 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance, to permit her to establish and operate a day nursery (pre-school center) on property located on Old Route 9, presently owned by Amoroso, being parcel # 6157-02-552940, in an HB -1 zone, in the Town of Wappinger. The Chairman read the legal notice. Ms. Cynthia Lynch was present for the Appeal. Mr. Landolfi asked if there were children signed up. Ms. Lynch replied that she had ten children from the Vassar Road and Village Crest apartments area and there would be some from other distances. Mr. Mc Millen asked how many children there would be. Ms. Lynch replied 25. Mr. Mc Millen asked about Social Services. Ms. Lynch replied that she did not need a license as it is a Play group for only three hours, there would be two sessions a day, five days a week. She added that they might run for four or five weeks in the summer depending on the interest and that she was renting the property and had a lease. Mr. Mc Millen commented that the Special Use Permit would be tied into the lease and.askidabout what would be done with the other part of the house. Ms. Lynch replied that she did not know what would be there but it used to be a dentist's office. Mr. Gunderud noted that he mentioned a fence in his comments as this might provide some control on the traffic coming in and out. Zoning Board of Appeals -11- August 14th, 1979 Mr. Mc Millen noted that signs might control this. Mrs. Waddle added that there had been a day center in the building years ago and there was very little traffic on that road. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone else present who wished to be heard. No one present wished to be heard. The hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m. The Board then recessed their meeting and reconvened at 9:27 p.m. With regard to Appeal # 441, at the request of Heidimarie Geraci, a motion was made by Mr. Mc Millen, seconded by Mrs. Waddle, that the variance be denied: as no financial hardship exists and retail uses are not permitted and the character of the district would be changed if the variance was granted. Motion Was Unanimously Carried With regard to Appeal # 442, at the request df Ronald Satallante, a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Mc Millen, that the requested variance be denied and that the appellant be advised that the horses shall not remain on the property overnight, the horses shall not remain on the property for any period in excess of four hours at any one time, there shall be no structure constructed for the overnight boarding of the horses and that compliance with Section 421, paragraph 1 of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance is required. Motion Was Unanimously Granted With regard to Appeal # 443, at the request of Julia Ann Robison, a motion was made by Mr. Prager, seconded by Mr. Mc Millen, that an amended Special Use Permit be granted to increase the occupancy to 12 children and to permit an employee. Motion Was Unanimously Carried With regard to Appeal # 444, at the request of Art -Tex Petroleunj a motion was made by Mr. Mc Millen, seconded by Mrs. Waddle, that the variance be granted with the retriction that the Appellant contact the Zoning Administrator on the size and location of the sign. Motion Was Unanimously Carried With regard to Appeal # 445, at the request of Stanley Porco, a motion was made by Mrs. Waddle, seconded by Mr. Prager, to grant the variance for fifty percent expansion as indicated on the plan dated revised August 9th, 1979 with the condition that site plan approval be obtained from the Planning Board. r+' Motion Was Unanimously Carried Zoning Board of Appeals -12- August 14th, 1979 With regard to Appeal # 446, at the request of Edward and Joan Sailer, a motion was made by Mr. Prager, seconded by Mr. Mc Millen, to grant the variance to permit the averaging of lot sizes as indicated on plat entitled "Preliminary First Subdivision of Lands of L.4.L.O.A./Sailer, Town of Wappinger, County of Dutchess, State of New York"', dated 2-12-79, latest revision dated 7-2-79 and prepared by Hayward and Pakan Associates. Motion Was Unanimously Carried With regard to Appeal # 447, at the request of Cynthia Lynch, a motion was made by Mr. Mc Millen, seconded by Mr. Prager, to recommend that a Special Use Permit be issued upon compliance with the following conditions: 1. Approval of the Town of Wappinger Highway Superintendent shall be obtained. 2. Approval of the Dutchess County Department of Health shall be obtained. 3. Appellant shall comply with the requests of the Hughsonville Fire Company in accordance with their dated August 14th, 1979. A copy of said letter is attached. 4. Any signs to be erected shall comply with the requirements of the Town of Wappinger Zoning Ordinance. The Appellant shall contact the Zoning Admialst=ator before any signs are erected. Motion Was Unanimously Carried Mr. Geraci then commented to the Board that the American justice system as represented by you (the Board) tonight stinks, I have had people sign a petition and came in here tonight and based on an anonymous call and letter you (the Board) give them consideration and I do have a hardship, my wife has been sick and have had bills and who am I hurting. Mr. Mc Millen replied that the traffic really has nothing to do with the Board's decision, that the use Mr. Geraci wants is not a permitted accessory use in a residential zone and that the Board did not have the authority to bend for this that this would create hundreds of other uses. J Mrs. Waddle noted that the anonymous letter had no bearing in the decision. Mr. Mc Millen added that it was a retail use, goods are being ex- changed, change it to a telephone operation and not have goods on the property possibly work this out with some restrictions. Mrs. Waddle noted that if the property could not be used for residential purposes that this would be a hardship but in this case that is not so. Mr. Ernest Galderisi asked about what if there was only one tv and one steeeo on display. Mr. Mc Millen asked where would the tvs and stereos be, if you Zoning Board of Appeals -13- August 14th, 1979 have direct system then you have no problem. Mr. Galderisi then asked instead of it going to the Geracis, have it delivered to the buyer's home. Mr. Landolfi noted that the Board would have to write to the Attorney to the Town to find out if it would be permissible to keep demonstrator models, make appointments to view them, take the order and then deliver directly to the buyer's home instead of keeing a stock in trade and could this be considered a customary home occupation. He added that the Board could give Mr. Geraci an answer by the next meeting which will be September 11th. Mr. Galderis then asked if the business could continue to operate on a temporary basis. Mr. Galderisi was asked if he had any involvement in the business. Mr. Galderisi replied that he was not a partner in the business but wanted to help his friend. Mr. Geraci noted that he has sold tvs and still has televisions which are covered by the warranties for return and exchange. The Board indicated that they had no problem with the televisions covered by the warranties. Mr. Landolfi noted that if what the Board was suggesting to the Attorney could be done this will be settled by September 11th. Mrs. Waddle noted that there are a number of permitted home occupations. Mr. Geraci added that as economics get rougher and rougher these kinds of operation will be creeping up and these laws will have to be changed. Mr. Mc Millen added that most zoning ordinances within the State are the same. Mr. Mc Millen then made a motion to rescind his original motion denying the variance and to table action on the request until the Board receives a response from the Attorney to the Town. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Waddle. Motion Was Unanimously Carried A motion was then made by Mr. Prager, seconded by Mr. Mc Millen, to adjourn. Motion Was Unanimously Carried The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, br (Mrs. etty-Ann Russ, Secretary TTrrn nnunvF.n