HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1976-03-01 +BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HALL, ITHACA NEW
'YORK, MARCH 1, 1976
At a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of
Ithaca, held in Common Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca, New
York, on March 1, 1976:
PRESENT Peter Martin, Chairman
Gregory Kasprzak
Edgar Gasteiger
C. Murray Van Marter
Rega Wood
Dr. Martin Greenberg
Edison Jones, Deputy Building Commissioner
Secretary
Chris Smith, Recording Secretary i
The Board operates under the provisions of the Ithaca City
Charter and the Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Our proceedings are info4-
mal in a sense as we are not bound by strict rules of legal evidence.
We ask that those who do present evidence or testimony before our
hearing limit themselves to the issue at hand and not simply add
a voice of yea or nay to the ultimate issue which confronts the
Board. We ask that all people who do speak come forward and identify
themselves by name and address and as I've already said limit thei
remarks to the issue which are before the Board. In conducting
the hearing having all those who wish to speak in favor of the
requested actions speak first and then we ask those who wish to
speak against the requested action to speak next. As you present
testimony members of the Board may have questions for you. Let
i
me ask members of the Board that they follow my good example and
turn your microphone on when you are speaking so that we are sure j
to get it on the tape. Apparently there have been problems in the
past. Mr. Secretary what is our docket for this evening?
MR. JONES: Mr. Chairman, Appeal 1108 - Appeal of Rev. Thomas L.
Jackson for an area variance at 109-111 Utica Street in a R-3 use
district under Section 30.25, Col. 4, held over from February 2,
i
1976 meeting.
MR. MARTIN: Would the person representing the appellant wish to
present the case?
REV. JACKSON: My name is Tom Jackson and I did enter the appeal,
I was wondering first of all if the Board had gotten the information
that I turned in last week?
2
I�
jiMR . MARTIN: Lets see what the members of the Board have. We all
have a copy of the Appeal, I have a letter from you dated February
26, do all the members of the Board have that? Then we have the
recommendation from the Planning Board in this case.
REV. JACKSON: Yes, in my letter there was some information which
had been prepared for the Planning Board meeting last week.
MR. MARTIN: That' s right, we have all of that. Now, perhaps so
that everyone else knows what we have, would you like to summarize
what' s there and then make any elaborations on it or respond to an
questions.
REV. JACKSON: Ok, discussing only the parking variance aspects
of the situation. The property is now zoned as a two family dwelling
which I purchased, the closing took place on February 4. I am
simply at the position of making a decision as the owner of the
property whether to keep it a two family dwelling or to lease it
as a group home to Group Homes Inc. To change the use to a group
• home I am contending that the parking which is admittedly congested
on Utica Street would not increase and could possibly decrease. The
two family dwelling would allow me to put several persons into that
property as two families in the R-3 zone and I would assume from
my own experiences that renting to students or similar occupants
it is quite possible to have at least one car per resident. The
present occupants of the property live there on a temporary basis
until this is determined, have a total of five vehicles.
MR. MARTIN: How many?
REV. JACKSON: Five
MR. MARTIN: Five
REV. JACKSON: Those are for two adults and two children on one
side and two adults on the other. That is four automobiles and
one motorcycle presently. One of those automobiles happens to be
a truck. I'm simply contending and it can be supported by Group
Homes that they have a policy of only one actual vehicle per house
parent, the couple in the house. They would have a rotating shift
of two house parents on at any given time. There would admittedly
be occasional visitors during the day to the Group Home if it shou d
exist, and probably occasional visitors in the evening. But the
i
3
i
point is that there are no present residents of the Tioga Street
house that could be moved there nor any plans for future residents
to be allowed their own cars. Therefore I'm assuming that at any
given time one or at the most two cars will be present at the house,
the actual residence of the house not counting the visitors. The
Group Homes staff that is mainly the house parents who are running
the Tioga Street house at this point could give you the history of
visitors and so forth. Therefore it' s a very simple contention
on my part that it would certainly not be increased and I would
assume it would be decreased over the past usage of the house .
MR. MARTIN: Ok, lets focus on the issue. You are requesting an
area variance that is to say the use proposed is consistant with
the R-3 designation.
REV. JACKSON: Yes, sir.
MR. MARTIN: The only problem with the zoning ordinance is its
requirement of off street parking and so that the only issue on
which you are seeking the variance is the off street parking
• requirement.
REV. JACKSON: Yes, there is no room on the property.
MR. MARTIN: And your contention is that rather than increase the
impact on the street this would perhaps diminish the parking probl m
on the street.
REV. JACKSON: I don't know that, I'm contending that it would not
increase the present usage of the historical usage of the street
parking.
MR. MARTIN: Are there other questions from members of the Board?
MR. KASPRZAK: Generally speaking, could you tell me whether there
are any houses in the area (the house in question) that do not hav
or do have parking off the street?
REV. JACKSON: I haven't really counted, there are several houses
without off street parking, several houses with. The houses on
each side of this particular property do have off street parking
but there are many houses that do not.
MR. KASPRZAK: Thank you.
MR. MARTIN: Am I right that it would be infeasible to provide
off street parking at this property?
I� 4
REV. JACKSON: Right, there is no space for it.
MR. MARTIN: There is no space.
REV. JACKSON: That' s right.
REGA WOOD: Assuming that it would be proper for this Board to do
• so, how would you feel about a restriction or stipulation for
instances that only two cars would be used.
REV. JACKSON: By the residence of the Group Homes?
REGA WOOD: Right.
REV. JACKSON: That would be fine with me, I would think that Grou
Homes would have to speak to you about that. As far as the owner
of the property that's fine with me. I'd assume that that' s fine
with them too.
REGA WOOD: Peter, is that correct?
MR. MARTIN: Right, in granting a variance it is the prerogative
of the Board to attach a condition that would help limit the impact
consistent with the grounds for granting the variance.
REV. JACKSON: You are saying two cars for the house. That would
be fine with me.
MR. MARTIN: Are there further questions;
REV. JACKSON: Could I ask a question about that? Assuming that
was done, that would have no affect on a two family dwelling, if
it was used for that I'd assume.
MR. MARTIN: That' s right, it would be attached to the variance
itself or the request that this could be used for the Group Home
or could be so limited. Are there further questions from members
of the Board? Is there someone here to represent the leasee, the
tenant?
• MR. KASPRZAK: Before you walk off sir, could you tell me how many
tenants, I didn't quite catch that I guess, how many tenants would
there be altogether in the home, at the height, at the peak lets
say.
REV. JACKSON: By Group Homes?
KASPRZAK: Yes
V. JACKSON: They would have eight residents plus two house parents.
KASPRZAK: So it would be ten individuals?
V. JACKSON: Yes
5
l
MR. KASPRZAK: Possibly living there.
IMR. GESSLEIN: I'm George Gesslein, President of Group Homes Board
of Directors, I live at R. D. ## 2 Locke (a little bit out side of
the city) . The proposal presented by Tom is essentially as we
understand it as far as a request for a variance. The parking tha
he has specified with the Group Homes using the property is essen-
tially as he has stated except we would prefer and we feel that
( practically speaking three cars should be a maximum. The reason
� is this, at the present time the Group Homes provides an automobile
to be used by the residence. The present house parents who live
right around the corner on Farm Street of course don't use an
automobile but it is conceivable at some time that they might leav
and there maybe another house parent that lives someplace else may
require an automobile. And then there is always two sets of house
parents, they alternate so that there is always two folks on duty
at all times. So it is conceivable that during the switch over
i which occurs on a few hours twice a week there would be three cars
there all belonging to the house parents or the Group Homes them-
selves. Any particular questions along those lines?
MR. MARTIN: So, if the Board were to attach a condition your
arguement would be that the condition ought to permit three auto-
mobiles, rather than two?
MR. GESSLEIN: I think as a practical item, yes because there will
be some times not for very long periods of time but when they are
switching over from one group of house parents to the other there
is an overlap. It is conceivable, not at this time but it is
conceivable in the future we might have three automobiles parked
out front at one time.
MR. MARTIN: Are there other questions?
MR. VANMARTER: I have a question. What would your feelings be for
a restriction such as this, we have no way of enforcing or anybody
else has any way of enforcing?
MR. GESSLEIN: I feel that we could live by it, knowing that that'
your desires. This is why I asked for the three because we have
no intention of violating any regulations in any shape or form.
We can't afford to we are funded by tax payers dollars.
6
DR. GREENBERG: When you speak of three cars being there possibly,
you seem to be getting into an area where parking is difficult
and the people may not be able to park there at all. Have you
taken that into consideration?
jMR. GESSLEIN: Yes, we have and this would occur during the day
when the major traffic tie up appears to be from some of the
discussion that I've heard at the Planning Board meeting, appears
to be later on in the afternoon when the people are trying to come
in and out from work and this sort of thing and it appears to be
the majority of the congestion and I would anticipate let me ask
Phil, your transfers would occur usually during the day time
hours right?
PHIL CAMPBELL: One day of the week it occurs in the morning and
one day a week it' s late in the evening.
MR. GESSLEIN: It is late in the evening?
PHIL CAMPBELL: Occasionally, no problem.
MR. GESSLEIN: It could be late in the evening, which would add, I
don't think that it would add an awful lot, but that is my own
opinion. Because of the other possible uses.
MR. MARTIN: Other questions?
MR. KASPRZAK: I have a question but I'm not sure that it is an
appropriate question. If it isn't please say so and I will with-
draw it. Could you tell me thinking in terms of economical renders
what kind of people will be living in that particular home, as it
is possible to determine:
MR. GESSLEIN: As far as the economical ranges, I can't, I would
say that the children are generally from middle class families,
does that sound about right? That' s about as specific as I can
get and that' s not bery specific , I'm sorry. They vary quite a bit.
MR. MARTIN: I think that that's all the questions. Thank you.
Are there others present this evening who would like to speak and
present evidence on behalf of the requested Appeal?
MR. VANMARTER: Peter, I have a question regarding the application.
It probably should be directed towards Mr. Jackson. The last two
portions of the application relating to area variance are not
completed on the form. Is there a reason for this?
" 7
REV. JACKSON: I filled out the form and turned it into Mr. Jones
and I thought it was completed.
MR. VANMARTER: Well, let me ask and see if we can fill this in so
that the questions are answered even though they are not completed
on the form. The conditions are unique and not shared by all
properties in this area and in this case it would relate to parkin
only. There is a unique condition there which does not pertain to
other properties in the immediate vicinity.
REV. JACKSON: I'm not sure exactly what that means. There is a
difficulty in providing off street parking on that property and
other properties there. And some properties do have off street
parking or the ability to create that.
MR. VANMARTER: It has been brought out that in some locations there
are driveways or garages or somewhere to park off the street and
in other cases there are not. Would you venture a guess as towards
numbers of how that might occur?
REV. JACKSON: Not really, as I simply observed that the difficulties
in most situations seems to be not so much the area not being
available as getting to the area that is there is several houses
with substantial enough back yards to provide that but not enough
side yard space to create a driveway.
. VANMARTER: Ok, the third part of this reads as follows: The
exception would observe the spirit of the ordinance and would not
change the character of the district. " Could you enumeriate any
reasons why you feel that this might be so?
EV. JACKSON: I don't feel that it would change the character
f the district in that the property has had substantial straight
al-king in the past as had several of the other houses on the block
and we are not asking to increase that street parking nor the
character of the neighborhood. There is as far as even the use of
he house there are properties in that block which are rental units
t this point and that could be the case in this too. It will be
rental unit whether it is a two family or a single family group
ome.
VANMARTER: Thank you.
MARTIN: Thank you. Are there any others present tonight who
8
wish to speak in favor of the appeal? I have one letter if there
are none present. I have a letter that I would like to read into
the record at this point because it seems to me that it is in
favor of the appeal and then we will ask for those who wish to
speak against. The letter is from Dennis A. Winters, Planner,
Tompkins County Planning Department. It is addressed to Ms.
LeGrace Benson, Chairperson of the Board of Planning and myself as
Chairperson of the Zoning Board of Appeals. As you can see from
the inside address, which is 518 N. Tioga Street, my wife, child
and I reside directly across thestreet from the present Tioga
Street Group Home. We have owned our house for almost 2� years,
having moved in exactly one month after the Group Homes had. Having
an understanding of the situation at the Group Homes based upon a
close relationship with them, I feel that such a variance should
be granted so that they could move into a more suitable habitat.
There are tvo overriding issues in this case as we have experienced
it. One relates to the parking situation itself; the other to the
concept of the Group Homes and the people living within. I hope
that my relating of our experiences on these issues will have ease
the concerns of the residents on Utica Street. Parking: I do
not have a driveway on my property so I am forced to park on the
street and, of course, would feel the impact of additional parked
cars. There have been a number of visitors to the Group Homes but
perhaps slightly more than to the average family. Visitors may
park on the street for periods of 15 minutes to perhaps three
hours. As I recall, there are no overnight nor lengthly stays. I
have not experienced any inconvenience due to their parking on the
street. Any parking problems that we have experienced appear to
e due to downtown workers who are looking for free parking some-
hat close to their place of employment. Group Homes: They fill
an important need for kids who, through little fault of their own,
have had family or societal problems. Although some may be a bit
immature, they are not unlike kids living with their own families.
We have found them to be both helpful and trustworthy. They have
assisted me in my home when I have needed some strong backs and
f
1
9
good hands. We have gone so far as to have some of them babysit
, for our child. These have been very positive experiences for all
of us. I would expect that the residents on Utica Street will
find similar opportunities for members of the Group Home to help
them; while at the same time affording everyone an opportunity to
understand the needs of everyone else to fit into a community.
1I doubt if the Group Homes could have found better house parents
than those who have worked there. Pat and Phil Campbell, the
present parents, are most competant, understanding and firm when
dealing with the kids. They seem to have a good handle on the j
situation. Summarily, they have all been good neighbors. Based I
upon my experiences , I would favor the granting of the variance.
Sincerely, Dennis Winters
Alright we now ask anyone who would like to speak in opposition
to the requested area variance, to do so.
ROBERT BOOTHROYD: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is
Robert Boothroyd and I live at 807 N. Cayuga Street in the City of
Ithaca. A couple of things about your proposed variance. For
those of you who are not familiar with Utica Street in its four or
five block length I think that there is one commercial property
that fronts on Utica Street and that would be Bon Ton Glass Shop.
I might be wrong there might be another one. It is essentially a
residential character neighborhood throughout its short length.
Essentially it is a fairly narrow street, actually the city would
e doing the residents a favor of Utica Street if they prohibited
parking on one side of the street however, I'm sure that would
stir up more of a protest than what we have presently. So there is
parking problem there and you should bear that in mind. Now, I'm
ere to address myself to the issue which is the parking Mr. Chairm tn,
ut since one of your letters opened up the issue of the Group Home
'd like to comment on that very briefly, if you would allow me to.
would like to say a lot more things than I have time to say. I
ersonally really have no objection to the concept of Group Homes
think that you people do a great job. I do have objection as to ,
here you want to put it however. Now, in the same article in
he February 24 Ithaca Journal # 1 the concept of a Group Home in a
I
j' 10
i
residential neighborhood was approved by the Planning Board and
in the second part of that issue the Planning Board also refrained
from changing the Court Street area etc. from residential to busin ss
because "The Planning Board wished to retain the residential
quality of the neighborhood. " Now, I find that a rather interests g
contrast and I would ask that you consider that particular situati n.
Now to the issue at hand. In our area a few years some people
wanted to put in some apartment houses which we had no objections
to. They came around to the area, they came around to all the
residents within the block and asked them to sign a petition. And
the petition stated that they had made provisions for off street
parking which I beleive is part of the Cities prerogative I'm not
up on that Ed, maybe you can help me on that. But in anycase
there was no objections from any people in the neighborhood. I
have here a petition that I will present to you Mr. Chairman, that
contains the names of 94 residents in the area which you wish to
grant the zoning variance. Requesting that it be denied. Now, I
would hope and these are residence of the area, people who live
ere. Maybe it' s 93 maybe it' s 92 but in any case it' s 90+. I
would request that first of all I don't particularly envy you but
in anycase the residence of the neighborhood have rights also.
When you have as many people as that all within a 200 ft. area of
that particular zoning variance that you want to grant that you
five that some weight. Other than that I would have nothing more
o say, if you have questions I'd be more than glad to answer them
or you if I can.
MARTIN: It was argued in behalf of the appeal that the use of
that property as a duplex currently generates 5 automobiles and it
fight continue to do so and roughly in that same magnitude and
that the proposed use as a group home would actually reduce (or
ight) .
BOOTHROYD: I have no objection to that particular arguement.
r. Chairman, I'm not in a position to comment whether it would or
ouldn't one way or the other. What I'm pointing out to you and
o the Board is that you have 94 upset neighbors.
. GASTEIGER: Are the neighbors objecting on the parking basis
s that the. . . . . . . . . . .
11
jJMR. BOOTHROYD: That is the basis well. . . . . . . . .
SMR. MARTIN: I will read the heading of the petition which has
been marked exhibit # 1 and is now part of the record of this
hearing. "We the undersigned, area property owners and taxpayers,
do hereby strenuously object to permitting the existence of a
Group Home at 109-111 Utica Street and granting a parking variance
in an already heavily congested area. " And the names and addresse
follow.
MR. BOOTHROYD: I don't know if that petition is in the legal form
but those are the signatures and addresses of the people in that
area.
MR. VANMARTER: May I ask a question? All the discussions of this
application have related to everything in the world except the
zoning ordinance. There is no question in my mind that a group
home is a permitted use in a R-3 district.
MR. BOOTHROYD: I don't argue that Murray, at all.
MR. VANMARTER: Then on what basis do you feel that we should
give some weight to a petition that is worded in this matter rather
than related to what the application has to do with and that is
parking.
MR. BOOTHROYD: I'm bringing the concerns of the neighborhood.
MR. VANMARTER: I've heard that, I've been reading the concerns
in the papers.
MR. BOOTHROYD: Ok
MR. VANMARTER: Disalluded neighbors !
MR. BOOTHROYD: I'm not a lawyer.
MR. VANMARTER: This is the only Board. . . . .
MR. BOOTHROYD: This is not a legal hearing, I'm simply stating
the concerns of the people in the neighborhood. i
MARTIN: Right, but the question is whether those concerns
are properly directed at this Board. I mean if the area is zoned
in a way that would permit that use then those concerns should
robably be beamed at the City Council rather than this Board
which has no control over the use of that property.
BOOTHROYD: Well, if you are aware that the city council spent
he last 5 years rezoning the City of Ithaca and in fact we are
i 12
I
i
Inot completely through with the rezoning process yet nor are we
likely to be. However, the Fall Creek area in its entirety as is
most of the City of Ithaca as you are aware except for some areas
of west hill, east hill and the cornell heights area is zoned R-3.
I can't think of any area in the flats that is not zoned R-3 or
business or some other permitted use other than R-2 or R-1. I
believe I'm correct on that particular statement.
MR. VANMARTER: You've named everything except Industrial and
Marine, that's right. They also appear on the flats.
MR. BOOTHROYD: As far as the zoning law is concerned, I'll agree
with you. It' s absolutely provided within the law.
MR. MARTIN: And it' s that law which governs this hearing and
governs the actions of the Board. And to grant an area variance
which is what is requested here on the issue of parking which is
the only issue before the Board. What we would have to find is
that there are practical difficulties or special conditions which
make the regulations concerning off street parking unreasonable
or impossible to comply with. And in granting the variance
modifying these regulations would not violate the spirit of the
regulation to be altered or the ordinance. That is the issue
before the Board.
MR. BOOTHROYD: I agree as I'm sure you do that there is more
involved here than the issue over parking.
MR. MARTIN: It seems to me that there is things that people are
concerned about other than the parking but the question is whether
the Board has any power to take those into account. Well, are
there further questions from members of the Board? I guess not,
are there further things that you would like to say?
MR. BOOTHROYD: Thank you for allowing me to speak.
MR. MARTIN: Is there anyone else who has testimony relevant to
this case, like someone who would like to speak in opposition to
the requested variance?
ED AUSTIN: Good evening, my name is Ed Austin, I'm a property
owner at 104 Utica Street. My residential address is 104 Williams
Glen Road. But I am a property owner on Utica. Street. I would
like to clarify a few factors if I might, I do think that there
13
Ii
alis some confusion. The petition that I signed along with the
other 90 some odd people, was that we are not concerned about the
present use or the present zoning on Utica Street. We are opposed
to a change in use and if parking is the question than we would
be opposed to any regulations governing parking, or any change in
use of the property. For a point of information at the present
time I believe there are approximately 14 properties that front
on Utica Street in the 100 block. Of the 14, I believe 11 have of
street parking of their own. There are three without. One being
the property in question. I believe that is all that I have to
say. Are there any questions?
MR. MARTIN: Are there questions from members of the Board? Thank
you very much. Is there anyone else who has some testimony that
they would like to present?
BILL SULLIVAN: My name is Bill Sullivan and I own 113 Utica. It
is true that you can grant a variance restricting the number of
cars to be used at this place but there is no way that you can
put down a number for visitors and visitors cars. There is no
way that this can be enforced and they have made no stipulation
really as to what times. They said basically visitors will appear
all times at day and possibly in the evening. Therefore the numbe
of actual cars is irrelevent to the situation. This place is going
to be drawing visitors, it has to draw social workers, and the
children can have visitors also into the evening. This is going
to put more of a load on the parking situation than anything else,
I would believe. It ceases to be just a regular residence. It' s
a place where there are many people all of which have various
different people come visit them. And this sort of thing in that
neighborhood which is very crowded right now, could lead to
disaster as far as I'm concerned.
MR. MARTIN: Questions?
MR. GASTEIGER: Would you care to comment on the current situation
or are you happy with the 5 vehicles that are parked there now?
MR. SULLIVAN: I get along, because I have a driveway. But any-
one who comes to visit me you know, I'm allowed visitors also as I
think this Group Home is but even now people who come to visit me
14
are forced to park quite someways away.
MR. MARTIN: Further questions?
MR. SULLIVAN: Also, the Planning Board I believe gave you an
affirmitive go ahead. . . . . . . .
MR. MARTIN: There recommendation was for grant of the variance,
that is right.
MR. SULLIVAN: Well, I don't know if it would be welcomed or not
but I don't believe, I believe that those people came into their
meeting with very closed minds. If you would like to hear it I
can give you a few things just as the meeting proceeded it pretty
much determined the way that everybody was feeling long before any
vote was ever taken.
MR. MARTIN: I hope you will take our assurance that we come into
this meeting with an open mind and we would rather not get into
the state of mind. . . . . . . . .
MR. SULLIVAN: Well, that' s all that matters.
• MR. VANMARTER: I'd like not to hear that. And I'd like to re-
emphasize the fact that this is the only Board that comes and sits
that has a list of rules and regulations and it must be adheared t( .
MR. SULLIVAN: Very good.
MR. VANMARTER: All the commentation and commentary and reports
in the paper and the hearing of the Planning Board Advisory, and
they do not have a set of rules and regulations that are governed
the way the actions of this Board governs and I'm repeating this
to you just to remind you, and I'm hearing what you say.
MR. SULLIVAN: Ok, thank you.
MR. MARTIN: Are there others that would like to speak? If not,
that concludes our hearing in this case. Our procedure is to go
into executive session to deliberate on this matter and then at
the conclusion of that we will reconvene in public session to anno -
ce our decision. We will now then go into executive session.
15
I�
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, EXECUTIVE SESSION
MARCH 1, 1976
APPEAL # 1108
I
Mr. Martin moved that the area variance be granted. Dr. Greenberg
• seconded the motion.
FINDINGS OF FACTS
11) The house at 109-111 Utica Street may continue to be used as
a duplex without compliance with the current off street parkin
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, since it was built before
those requirements were enacted.
2) Creating off street parking at this property, is according to
the testimony presented infeasible. This property is one of a
limited number of properties on Utica Street lacking space for
off street parking.
3) The proposed variance would seem to be consistent with the
spirit of the regulation by being altered, since continued use
of the property as a duplex may create at least as much of a
parking problem as the proposed use as a group home.
4) Testimony presented indicated that the current tenants of the
duplex have five (5) vehicles.
Vote: Yes - 4 No - 2
Application has been granted.
Let the record show by a vote of three (3) against, two (2) for
and one (1) abstention the Board rejected the attachment of a
condition to the proposed variance.
Discussion was held on the memo from Mr. Martin Shapiro, Attorney
for the City dated December 19, 1975 on Appeal # 1102. The Board
took an action to invite the appellant to the Board of Zoning
Appeals April 5 meeting; also Mr. Martin Shapiro, Attorney for
The City and so instructed the secretary to advise these persons.
16
i
I�
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
i
I , CHRISTINE SMITH, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, in the matters of Appeal
No. 1108 on March 1, 1976, at City Hall, City of Ithaca, New York,
that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true copy of
the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the Executive
CD
Session of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, on the above
date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability.
Christine Smith
Recording Secretary
Sworn to before me this
/az day ofZQiLc , 1976.
Notau is
MARY E. BENSON No. 55-5270900
Notary Public, Slate of New York
Qualified in Tompkins County
My Commission Expires Match 3%19 7�