Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1981-07-08 � o TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 8 , 1981 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Wednesday , July 8 , 1981 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Jack D . Hewett , Henry Aron , Joan G . Reuning , Edward N . Austen , Edward W . King , Lewis D . Cartee ( Town Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer ) , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , ALSO PRESENT : R . James Miller , Esq . , Alfred C . Eddy , Ronald Kerfoot , Joel Lansdowne , Ulric Neisser , Arden Neisser , Paul J . Becker , Deb Odell , Steve Patton , Steve Eddy , Mildred Eddy , Valerie Littlefield , John Perialas , Ann Goldfarb , Joel H . Silbey , Herbert Deinert , Dooley Kiefer , David O ' Flaherty ( WHCU News ) , Mary Earle (WTKO News ) , Don Ross ( Ithaca Journal ) , Two Names ( illegible ) . Chairman Hewett declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 40 p . m . and accepted for the record. the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the ® Ithaca Journal on June 30 , 1981 and July 3 , 1981 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion , as appropriate , and upon each of the applicants and / or agents , as appropriate , on July 1 , 1981 . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM JUNE 24 , 1981 ) OF ALFRED C . EDDY , APPELLANT , IN RE THE SALE OF NURSERY PRODUCTS , SOFT DRINKS , AND ANY FARM PRODUCTS NOT INCIDENTAL TO FARMING , AT EDDY ' S ROADSIDE STAND , ELMIRA ROAD , PARCEL NO . 6 - 35 - 1 - 10 . 11 ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Hewett announced that the Board was still deliberating the Eddy matter and is considering the mass of material that has been submitted , much of it within the last few hours . Chairman Hewett stated that a decision will be announced by the Board at the next meeting of the Board . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM FEBRUARY 25 , 1981 , AND FROM JUNE 24 , 1981 ) OF ELIZABETH C . STILES , APPELLANT , ROBERT J . CLUNE , ESQ . , AS AGENT , IN RE THE OCCUPANCY OF A TWO - FAMILY DWELLING BY FOUR OR MORE UNRELATED PERSONS AT 131 SNYDER HILL ROAD , PARCEL NO . 6 - 57 - 1 - 7 . 4 , ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7 : 45 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Neither Ms . Stiles nor Attorney Clune were present . ® Mr . Cartee stated that he met Mr . Clune at the Post Office and advised him , again , of the adjournment at the last meeting . Mr . Zoning Board of Appeals - 2 - July 8 , 1981 Cartee stated that Attorney Clune advised him that he would advise his client to appear at this meeting in person and that he [ Clune ] would not be here to represent her . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals find and hereby does find that the occupancy of the premises owned by Elizabeth C . Stiles and located at 131 Snyder Hill Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 57 - 1 - 7 . 4 , are in violation of the occupancy provisions of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and , after several Notices and adjournments of Hearings on her behalf without receiving any cooperation from the owner , said Board of Appeals , therefore , direct and hereby does direct the Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer to proceed with the prosecution of this matter forthwith . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Hewett , Aron , Reuning , Austen , King . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in and the ® matter of the Stiles Appeal duly closed at 7 : 49 p . m . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM OCTOBER 22 , 1980 ) OF ULRIC AND ARDEN NEISSER , APPELLANTS , IN RE THE OCCUPANCY OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BY MORE THAN THREE UNRELATED PERSONS AT 115 McINTYRE PLACE , PARCEL NO , 6 - 66 - 6 - 41r ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 50 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Neisser was present . Mr . Neisser appeared before the Board and stated that they are now back in Ithaca and there are no other persons living in their house , adding that he thought , therefore , the matter was null and void . Mr . Cartee stated that the house was now in compliance with the occupancy requirements . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : . RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals dismiss and hereby does dismiss the Appeal of Ulric and Arden Neisser in re occupancy of their single family home at 115 McIntyre Place , the matter being moot . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . ® Aye - Hewett , Aron , Reuning , Austen , King . Nay - None . Zoning Board of Appeals - 3 - July 8 , 1981 ® The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in and the matter of the Neisser Appeal duly closed at 7 : 54 p . m . ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM DECEMBER 17 , 1980 ) OF ANN GOLDFARB , APPELLANT , IN RE THE OCCUPANCY OF A TWO- FAMILY DWELLING BY A FAMILY AND THREE UNRELATED PERSONS AT 120 EASTERN HEIGHTS DRIVE , PARCEL N0 . 6 - 57 - 1 - 8 . 1121 ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 55 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mrs . Goldfarb was not present . Mr . Cartee stated that he had not been able to get a hold of Mrs . Goldfarb after many , many tries , nor has he been able to inspect the house . Mr . Cartee stated that Mrs . Goldfarb inherited this problem , commenting that she seemed sincere , however , she is not present tonight . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen : WHEREAS , due to the situation Mrs . Goldfarb has found herself in , the Zoning Board of Appeals has been very fair in this situation and ® has extended the matter for some seven months ; NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals instruct and hereby does instruct the Town of Ithaca Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer to send a notice to Mrs . Goldfarb informing her that , unless she satisfies him by an inspection within the next two weeks that the premises are in compliance with the Ordinance , he has been instructed to proceed with the prosecution of the violation of the Ordinance through the Town Justice Court . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Hewett , Aron , Reuning , Austen , King . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Hewett declared discussion of the Goldfarb matter closed at 7 : 59 p . m . APPEAL OF JOEL H . AND ROSEMARY J . SILBEY , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A FENCE GREATER THAN SIX FEET IN HEIGHT AND WITHOUT BUILDING PERMIT AT 105 JUDD FALLS ROAD , PARCEL NO , 6 - 66 - 4 - 16 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER ARTICLE XIII , SECTION 65 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ® ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Hewett declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - July 8 , 1981 matter duly opened at 8 : 00 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Silbey was present . Mr . Silbey appeared before the Board and stated that he had filed with the Board an explanation and map explaining the matter . Chairman Hewett stated that the Board had Mr . Silbey ' s completed Appeal Form and attached map . Mr . Silbey stated that the fence is already in place and is five feet ten inches in height for twelve linear feet and then about six feet one , maybe two , inches in height for ten feet toward the south , adding that that part of it is mostly made up of an area where NYSEG connected a house . Mr . Silbey stated that , to conform exactly , would necessitate a great deal of expense or a lop- sided fence , adding that , as it is , it is all but in conformity and is an attractive structure . Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak on this matter . Mr . Ulric Neisser , 115 McIntyre Place , spoke from the floor , and stated that the fence is not a problem to him . No one else spoke . Chairman Hewett closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 05 p . m . Mr . King asked Mr . Cartee if there were any evidence contrary to the petitioner ' s statement . Mr . Cartee stated that it is an attractive fence , adding that the reason he [ Cartee ] had visited the ® site , is that he received a complaint . Mr . Cartee stated that he would agree that the north end of the fence is less than six feet in height and , as it goes south , it gets a little higher , adding that he got up to six feet two inches . Mr . Cartee stated that inasmuch as he had received a complaint , he had no choice except to inspect it and issue a violation notice . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals find and hereby does find the matter of the Appeal of Joel H . and Rosemary J . Silbey with respect to a fence slightly over six feet in height for some ten linear feet to be a case of de minimus non curat lex - - " the law will not bother with trifles . " There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Hewett , Aron , Reuning , Austen , King . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Mr . Cartee asked if it were the desire of the Board to request that Mr . Silbey file an application for building permit . By a four to one show of hands , the members of the Board indicated to Mr . Cartee that no building permit was to be required . ® Chairman Hewett declared the matter of the Silbey Appeal duly closed at 8 : 10 p . m . Zoning Board of Appeals - 5 - July 8 , 1981 ® ADJOURNED APPEAL ( FROM JUNE 24 , 1981 ) OF JOHN AND _ DORIS PERIALAS , APPELLANTS , VALERIE LITTLEFIELD , AS AGENT , IN RE THE OPERATION OF A NURSERY SCHOOL AT 139 HONNESS LANE , PARCEL NO , 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 , ITHACA , N . Y . Chairman Hewett declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 20 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Perialas and Mrs . Littlefield were present . Chairman Hewett read aloud the following Resolution as adopted, by the Planning Board on July 7 , 1981 . " RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca supports the concept of the nursery school at 139 Honness Lane , Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 , Town of Ithaca , N . Y . , as proposed by Mrs . Valerie Littlefield and Mr . John Perialas , and encourages its due and proper consideration by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca , with the recommendation to said Board of Appeals that the matters of traffic , parking on Honness Lane , impact on the residential neighborhood , and possibly the adequacy of the lot and play area , be given careful consideration by said Board of Appeals , and FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Planning Board wishes to inform the Zoning Board of Appeals that the appropriateness of the house for such use was discussed with the applicants as well as their need to review the matter with the Tompkins County Health Department and the agency of the State of New York which deals with nursery schools and to abide by any regulations or requirements such agencies , or any others having jurisdiction , may set forth . " Mr . Austen stated that he had a question on the parking across the road which was whether that property was owned by Mr . Perialas , Mr . Perialas stated that he did own that property , adding that they are adding a minimum of eight spaces to the already existing six right across the street at 142 Honness Lane which he owns . Indicating on the drawings submitted to the Board for the first meeting [ June 24 , 19811 , Mr . Perialas indicated where , if they see they need more space , there would be an area for another four to six cars , and also another area where there would be space for four more . Chairman Hewett asked how many acres are involved , with Mr . Perialas responding that he owned two acres . Chairman Hewett stated that he would suggest not permitting any " backing out " . Mrs . Reuning , referring to the 139 Honness Lane property , asked how many parking spaces were available , with Mr . Perialas responding , eight in the driveway , six at the side , and two in the garage . Mr . Austen asked what the proposed enrollment might be , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , 30 to 32 . Mrs . Reuning asked about the ages ® of the children , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , 18 months to .51 or 6 year olds . Chairman Hewett wondered if they were there all at once , with Mrs . Littlefield responding that they arrive at different times . Zoning Board of Appeals - 6 - July 8 , 1981 ® Mrs . Reuning wondered how many employees would be involved , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , four plus her husband and herself . Mr . Aron asked if there would be staff parking , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , yes , and adding that there is room for eight cars , room for staff , and she and her husband arrive at the same time . Mr . Aron wondered if there would be no parking on the highway , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , if at all , only for a few minutes . Mrs . Reuning asked about the size of the play area , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , 10 , 000 square feet . Mr . Perialas noted for the record the Petition presented at the Planning Board meeting of July 7 , 1981 which stated that those signing had " no objection to a Montessori Nursery School being operated - at 139 Honness Lane , Ithaca , NY 1485011 . The Petition was signed by 10 persons . Mr . Perialas also presented the same Petition to the Zoning Board of Appeals members bearing the same signatures plus three more signatures . Mr . King asked if Mr . Perialas or Mrs . Littlefield lived in the subject house , the answering being , no . Mr . King asked if anyone lived there , the answering being , no . Mr . King noted that the house is being totally dedicated to the school . Mrs . Littlefield noted that the hours would be from 8 : 00 a . m . to 5 : 00 p . m . , no weekends , no parties . Mrs . Littlefield stated that the school may run through the summer but the enrollment then would probably be lower . ® Mr . King asked about the yard area and the total lot , with Mr . Perialas responding that the lot area is 17 , 500 square feet and the play area 10 , 000 square feet . Mr . King noted that the Blatchleys own the adjacent field and asked if they intended to use it , with Mr . Perialas responding , no . Mr . King asked if the applicant had found out what State rules will apply . Mrs . Littlefield stated that she called the Health Department and talked with the head of this area - - Carl Burgess - - and he was very helpful and gave her information over the telephone and said he would be very happy to help her as she filled out the applications . Mr . King asked if Mr . Burgess had inspected this facility , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , no , and adding that his main concerns were public water and sewer which they are on . Mr . King noted that there may be State licensing and State controls involved . Mrs . Littlefield stated that they intend to apply . Mr . King wondered if there are rules , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , yes , and adding that they have some of the forms already . Mr . King asked if the teacher has to be licensed , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , " yes , and adding that she was a licensed Montessori teacher and the others would be her aides , further adding that they do not have to be licensed . Mr . King asked if the applicants anticipated cars stopping within Honness Lane to discharge children , with Mr . Perialas responding , no , adding that that is why they are adding " this " parking [ indicating ] . Mr . King wondered how that could be controlled , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , by signage and rules and regulations , and adding that she will keep them off the road . Mr . King suggested that Mrs . Littlefield could advise the parents in writing that this is one of the rules . Zoning Board of Appeals - 7 - July 8 , 1981 ® Mrs . Littlefield agreed and stated that one of the child care rules is that rules be posted . Mr . King observed that Honness Lane is a somewhat narrow road with open ditches and it is not conducive to the parking of cars along that highway in this area , although it is east of the old railroad bed and it is not the steep part of the road , adding that , actually , it is fairly level with good visibility up and down in that area . Mr . King stated that he was noting that from personal observation . Chairman Hewett asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak to this matter . Mr . Herbert Deinert , 130 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and stated that he had spoken last night at the Planning Board meeting on this matter . Mr . Deinert stated that he had also dictated some comments to the Secretary , Mrs . Fuller , for presentation to the Board at its meeting on June 24 , 1981 , which were presented at that time . [ Mr . Deinert ' s comments were as follows : " Mr . Deinert is unable to attend this public hearing and wishes the record to indicate that he is strongly opposed to having a third commercial building in this neighborhood . This is a residential neighborhood and there already exists the non - conforming uses formerly owned by Hunna Johns on Honness Lane . IThe house in question is a two - family house and Mr . Deinert is very apprehensive about this nursery school proposal . He ® does not want any further commercial activity in the neighborhood nor any further noise . IThere is hardly enough parking for the occupants in the house now . Honness Lane is very narrow and with the continuing expansion of Eastwood Commons , it is being heavily travelled already . It is particularly hazardous in the winter since it is one of the last roads to get plowed by the Town . A nursery school would make it worse with parked cars even if only for twenty or thirty minutes twice a day . " Mr . Deinert stated that he found himself in a bit of a quandry . Mr . Deinert stated that no one has any reservations about Mr . Perialas and his daughter , nor the Montessori concept , however , two churches on Honness Lane and some multiple family homes were also fine in concept , adding that all of these causes are worthy causes , but they do produce side effects . Mr . Deinert stated that the earlier additions to the road which runs between Slaterville Road and Pine Tree Road less than a half mile southeast of the City limits produced a generous amount of traffic . Mr . Deinert expressed a concern for noise , commenting that you would not invite 30 children into your house and prevent them from making noise - - you cannot do that . Referring to the churches present , Mr . Deinert noted that at one time Honness Lane had no churches and now there are two , adding that the access road to those two churches is Honness Lane , Mr . Deinert stated that the additonal traffic generated has been momentous . Mr . Deinert stated that another change in the area has been Eastwood Commons which in itself is probably the kind of residential building of the future to which he ® has no objection , however , it has generated enormous traffic on Honness Lane , Mr . Deinert spoke of the two - family homes on Snyder Hill Road and stated that most of those families use Honness Lane to Zoning Board of Appeals - 8 - July 8 , 1981 ® come and go . Mr . Deinert stated that the most recent development in the neighborhood occurred yesterday when the Town moved into the area to dismantle and build the bikeway . Mr . Deinert described people sitting on their porch which is covered with dust and road salt , and bemoaning the fact that it is no longer " idyllic " . Mr . Deinert stated that the most significant change is traffic and noise . Mr . Deinert stated that he wondered if we do need additional traffic on Honness Lane - - like 30 cars coming and reappearing . Mr . Deinert stated that , as far as parking , he thought the Perialases have enough room in their own driveway but the staff will take that up . Mr . Deinert stated that the parking area across the street he did not think has enough room , in addition to the people already living there , to accommodate new cars . Mr . Deinert stated that we are dealing with a parking problem which is not totally alleviated by his offering land for parking , adding that Honness Lane has a rather high crown and no shoulders . Mr . Deinert stated that this is hazardous even for ten minutes which it easily takes to unbundle a child in the winter . Mr . Deinert stated that the children themselves will be noisy and add to the noise level on Honness Lane , Mr . Deinert stated that he had the same reservations reflected in the report from the Planning Board , adding that , if the approval is granted , there should be some safeguards built into that change - - for example , the change applies to that property alone ; no permanent structural changes are going to be made in that house so that as soon as this operation is terminated it goes back to a two - family house . Mr . Deinert offered that , suppose there were a fire ® escape , it should be built in such a fashion as to be removed or lifted off if they like . Mr . Deinert stated that much of what he was saying is based on a fear which may simply have no basis in the way that the school is going to operate , adding that nothing may ever materialize , but also , as you say , that cannot be validated . Mr . Deinert suggested a tentative approval to last one year or 18 months and then the issue is reevaluated and then , if everything is agreeable , permission could be granted on a two - year basis , adding , in other words , do not grant permission unconditionally but say no alteration , return to two - family , and not in perpetuity . Mr . Perialas asked Mr . Deinert if he did not think that the neighbors would object also , with Mr . Deinert responding , yes , but , he felt formal safeguards should be built into this . Mrs . Littlefield stated that they have approvals from all of their immediate neighbors , adding that Mr . Deinert is the only one complaining and does not speak for them . Mr . Deinert stated that at that time we would have thirty angry parents supporting Mrs . Littlefield also , adding that he thought the Littlefields would be very safe operating under those conditions . Mrs . Reuning stated that she did not think a variance should be granted without conditions such as repainting it and a certain number of months . Mr . King stated that this is a special approval situation rather than a variance - - a matter of special approval with conditions and ® the very fact of conditions is that you live up to them or the matter is in jeopardy . Mr . King stated that there is an automatic implied review . Mr . King stated that this particular property does not strike r Zoning Board of Appeals - 9 - July 8 , 1981 ® him as being ideal for this use . Mr . Perialas stated that he was granted approval for across the street but he felt the place was not suitable so they did not follow up . Mr . Perialas stated that this concept is much better in that it is a home atmosphere , adding that no matter where she [ Valerie Littlefield ] went it would be like this . Mr . King offered , in other words , it would be in a residence area . Mr . Littlefield stated that the original concept of Maria Montessori in Italy was that it be a " home operation " . Mr . Deinert stated that the question of periodic review is taken care of by the kind of agreement we would enter into , adding that he withdrew that tentative review suggestion , and further adding that he believed that was the case in the Montgomery May sheep matter . Mr . Cartee stated that that was not accurate , adding that the Board limited the number of sheep and gave permission to no one else than Mr . May , Mr . King asked about plans for the outside play area , with Mrs . Littlefield describing fencing in the backyard so that it would be totally fenced in . Mrs . Reuning wondered if the children would do gardening , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , yes , as part of the Montessori concept . Mrs . Littlefield stated that the larger apparatus would be movable , adding that they are not planning to pour cement for ® the swings and nothing would really be permanent and things will be movable . Mrs . Littlefield stated that the swing sets will be made by her husband , adding that the sand box would be fairly permanent but it could be moved . Mr . King asked when the school would begin were permission to be granted , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , early September . Mr . Aron wondered how many there would be in the play yard outside at one time . Mrs . Littlefield stated that .there would be one group at a time , with the maximum at one time being between 13 and 16 . Mr . Aron , commenting that children are noisy outside as we all know , asked Mrs . Littlefield how she intended to keep the noise down , with Mrs . Littlefield responding that there would be planned games , dance , music , and gymnastics . Mr . Aron asked what action would be taken if the children were extremely noisy , with Mrs . Littlefield responding that there would be discipline in the backyard . Mr . King asked again if there were to be any changes in the house , with Mr . Perialas responding , none . Chairman Hewett noted that there may need to be an external fire escape , with Mr . Perialas responding that they will do whatever necessary in that regard . Mr . King asked if everyone on the Board had seen this place ; all five members had visited the site . Mr . King stated that he thought it might be better if the Board were to defer a decision and discuss this proposal along with the EAF , ® and consider all of the factors which might go into any conditions if approval were to be granted . Zoning Board of Appeals - 10 - July 8 , 1981 ® Chairman Hewett closed the Public Hearing at 9 : 00 a . m . MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Jack Hewett : RESOLVED , that the matter of the Perialas / Little field Appeal be and hereby is adjourned until the next meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals . [ 7 / 22 / 81 . ] NON -AGENDA ITEM WITH RESPECT TO IACOVELLI PROPERTIES ON KENDALL AVENUE Mr . King stated that he would like to advise the Board , on the record , in the matter of the Iacovelli Appeals on properties on Kendall Avenue , that today he received from Attorney Edward A . Mazza the executed restrictive covenants which the Board had requested , along with a check for recording the , two of them , along with an explanation as to additional matters related to filing the deed and its execution . Mr . King stated that Mr . Mazza asked that he hold the material until the County Clerk gets the book and number . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman Hewett declared the July 8 , 1981 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned at 9 : 10 p . m . ® Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals . Jack D . Hewett , Chairman