2003-01-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING HELD 1/14/03 Present: Lloyd Frink Chair, Susan Ruder, Vice Chair, David Cmwford, Newell Russell, Michal Kocan and Mary Ann Bolander. Others Present: James Alfonso Margaret Mcdonald Peter McDonald Tom Walsh Dale Stackhouse George Kolb Dawna Chase Tom Smith Eileen Sassmann Margaret Cuccia John Tolliver Joyce Couchalne Susan Masterson Judy Mmris Elizabeth Smith Meeting was called to order at 7:31 p.m. EILEEN SASSMANN AND MARGARET MCDONALD~ 73 SOUTH REMSEN AVE. First on the agenda was the public hearing on the request of Margaret McDonald and Eileen Sassmarm seeking a use variance to be able to convert a legal non-conforming two family house into a three family house at 73 South Remsen Avenue which is located in a single family zone. Applicant presented Board with Affidavit of Publication fi.om Pou~:Jakeepsie Journal and proof of mailings of legal notices. Secretary informed Board that Dutchess County Dept. of Planning had responded to Legal Notice with a "Matter of Local Concern" comment. Ms. Ruder stated that she had read the application and in the spirit of saving time and not presenting testimony that is not relevant to the case - when an applicant is applying for a use variance mad making a case for hardship, the evidence needs to be property hardship and not personal hardship. The personal situation of the applicant's family which was stated in the record is irrelevant to the decision of the ZBA. Ms. Ruder went on to state in the spirit of saving time and getting fight to the core of what the ZBA needs to hear, she would request that the Board stick to the property hardship amd financial evidence to support the property hardship. Applicant supplied pictures of the property and also affidavits from former tenants who rented there when the property was a three family house. Applicant stated she presented financial paperwork which shows there is no personal gain fi.om the rents in the house. It was also stated that the applicant does not live in the house. Applicant also stated that when the perspective tenant of the third apartment comes back to this area they would not be paying a substantial amount of rent because they are trying to build a new life back in the states. She went on to state that the third apartment was never considered a "money maker" - her parents used it mostly for family. Ms. Ruder stated that the property is already a non-conforming two family house in a single family zone. The variance would go with the property which means that the