HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1981-11-18 0
� o
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOVEMBER 18 , 1981
The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met on Wednesday , November
18 , 1981 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , N . Y . , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Acting - Chairman Edward W . King , Henry Aron , . Joan G . Reuning ,
ALSO PRESENT : Oscar Schaufelbuhl ( Wonderland Lodge ) , Adam Gatch , Doris
Gatch , R . C . Gray , Erik W . Carson , Mr . and Mrs . Lyle Jacobs ,
Dave Burbank ( WTKO ) .
Lewis D . Cartee ( Town Building Inspector ) , Nancy M . Fuller
( Secretary ) .
Acting - Chairman King 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 November
10 , 1981 , and November 13 , 1981 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s
Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice on all the various neighbors of
all the matters before the Board , including the parties to the actions , on
November 10 , 1981 .
APPEAL OF N . W . L . REALTY , APPELLANT , LARRY MARKS , AS AGENT , FROM THE
DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMIT FOR A CHANGE IN SIGNAGE
( LEGAL , NON- CONFORMING ) AT WONDERLAND MOTEL , 654 ELMIRA ROAD , TAX PARCEL NO .
6 - 33 - 3 - 6 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER SECTION 8 . 05 - 3 OF THE TOWN OF
ITHACA SIGN LAW ,
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 40 p . m .
Mr . Oscar Schaufelbuhl , representing Mr . Larry Marks , appeared before
the Board . Mr . King referred to the Appeal Form , reading as follows : " . . .
Having been denied permission to change sign at Wonderland Lodge , 654 Elmira
Rd . . . . PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and / or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows : The
sign was in bad repair and to have it remain in that condition would encourage
youngsters or others toward vandalism and breakage . The cocktail wording
and restaurant numbers no longer applied and I think the existing small old
fashioned car and wording is more attractive than the previous print . We
make every effort to maintain the appearance and dignity of the road - side ; it
makes for increased business and pleasantness .
NWL Realty & Const . Corp .
( Sgd . ) Lawrence Marks , Pres ,
Dated : 10 / 29 / 81 "
Mr . Schaufelbuhl noted that the Board members had received . a picture of
the new sign and Mr . Cartee distributed a picture of the sign as it has
existed . Mr . Schaufelbuhl stated that the old sign had been removed , i . e . ,
the portion reading " Cocktail Lounge - Single & Steak - $ 24 . 95 " , on June 14 ,
1981 , and that about three weeks ago they put up the new sign .
Mr . King asked if this . prbposal had gone to the Sign Review Board . Mr .
Cartee said that it had and inasmuch as the sign itself is not changed they
saw no reason not to recommend approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals with
the recommendation for variance . Mr . Cartee commented that the new sign ,
i . e . , the portion that previously advertised the cocktail lounge and now
reads " Park at Door ( picture of old - fashioned car ) " , inexactly the same
size as the previous sign .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 2 - November, 18 , 1981
Mr . King asked how long the sign had been in existence , wondering if it
had been there prior to the enactment of the 1972 Sign Ordinance . Mr . Cartee
® stated that it had been there since the 1960s . Mr . King stated that the
sign was , therefore , a legal , non - conforming sign .
Mr . King asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak to this
matter . No one spoke . The Secretary entered the following letter dated
November 13 , 1981 , from Frank R . Liguori , Commissioner of Planning , Tompkins
County Department of Planning :
" RE : Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239 - 1 and -m of the New York State
General Municipal Law
CASE : Appeal of N . W . L . Realty , Elmira Road
( State highway )
. . . This will acknowledge the receipt of the proposal for review under Section
239 -m .
The proposal , as submitted , will have no significant deleterious impact on
intercommunity , county , or state interests . Therefore , no recommendation is
indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to act without
prejudice . "
Mr . Aron stated that since there has not been any change in size and
since it is better than a blank view with nothing to see , he would recommend
the variance . Mr . King stated that he agreed also in view of the Board ' s
finding that the sign is a legal non - conforming use .
® MOTION by Mr . - Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals , having found
that the Wonderland Motel sign is a legal , non - conforming use . , grant and
hereby does grant , pursuant to Section 8 . 05 - 3 of the :Town of Ithaca Sign
- Law , a variance to permit a change in signage wording for Wonderland Motel ,
654 Elmira Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 3 - 6 , N . W . L . Realty &
Const . Corp . , Appellant . .
There being no further discussion , the Acting - Chairman called for a
vote .
Aye - King , Aron , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Acting- Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the matter of the
N . W . L . Realty Appeal duly closed at 7 : 46 p . m .
APPEAL OF NELSON EDDY , APPELLANT , ERIK CORSON , AS AGENT , FROM THE DECISION
OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION FOR THE OPERATION OF A WOOD -
WORKING SHOP IN. AN EXISTING STRUCTURE AT 430 BOSTWICK ROAD , TAX PARCEL N0 .
. 6 - 32 - 1 - 18 . 2 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XI , SECTION 51 ,
AND ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE .
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the above = noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 46 p . m. .
Mr . Erik W . CARSON , appeared before the Board and noted that his name
had been misread on the Appeal Form and thus appeared in the Notice as Corson .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 3 - November 18 , 1981
Mr . King read from the Appeal Form as written , as follows :
. . Having been denied permission to operate a woodshop , operated by Erik
® Carson , to make cabinets and furniture at 430 Bostwick Rd . . . . PRACTICAL
DIFFICULTIES and / or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows : I am ( a ) renting the
workspace , ( b ) need no plumbing as ( c ) there wouldn ' t be any current or
prospective customers coming onto the premises , ( d ) there is only one other
neighbor within signt besides my landlord and his farmhand ' s residences , and
( e ) the shop would only employ at most two people ( f ) only during the
daytime hours of 7 am - 6 pm , six days a week , ( g ) the shop is already
substantially electrically wired and built ( existing space ) .
( Sgd . ) Erik W . Carson
Dated : 10 / 21 / 81 "
Mr . Carson stated that the " two " employees mentioned are himself and a
helper who would work totally under his direction . He stated that he would
not work on Sunday .
The Board reviewed the Sketch which they had received with their copy
of the Appeal Form and noted that the property is located east of the Town
of Enfield . It was noted that the proposed workshop area is a 600 sq . ft .
portion of a large garage . Mr . Carson stated that he outlined his reasons
for the request on his Appeal Form and noted that the structure is existing
and already wired . He stated that the major thing that should be brought
to the attention of the Board is that no customers at all will be coming to
the shop . He referred to his business insurance and stated that it covers
only a .-- helper on a part - time basis . He stated that there will be no sign
and there will be no . telephone . He stated that it is basically an existing
shop that . he added a- . wall to .
Mr . King asked if this structure has been operated as a shop in the
past . Mr . Carson stated that he thought so , in the past .
Mr . King noted that the owner of the property is Nelson Eddy and that
the area is zoned Agricultural but the applicable rules are R- 30 . Mr .
King reviewed Section 18 of the Ordinance .
Mr . King asked if there were anyone who wished to speak to this matter .
No one spoke . Mr . King asked if there were any questions from the Board .
Mrs . Reuning , noting that . Mr . Carson ' s appeal had indicated at most two
people working , asked if that meant two additional people . Mr . Carson said ,
no , it meant a total of two people .
Mr . Aron stated that he did not comprehend one thing . He noted that Mr .
Carson had said - - no customers . Mr . Carson said that that was correct .
Mr . Aron stated that Mr . Carson had also said - - woodworking on cabinets and
furniture . Mr . Aron asked Mr . Carson how he would display his merchandise
for sale . Mr . Carson replied that he willhave portfolios , photos , and samples
which he would take to people ' s houses . Mr . Aron asked what Mr . Carson would
say if someone wanted to see him making a piece of furniture or a cabinet .
Mr . Carson replied that it would depend on what his insurance covers . Mr .
Carson stated that if he were allowed to have the occasional customer then
Is
he would , but , if it meant that he could not get the - variance then he would
not . Mr . Aron inquired if he had a $ 3 , 000 . 00 customer , he would say that he
could not come to the shop . Mr . Carson replied that he would .
Mr . King noted that Mr . Carson was saying that sales would be off the
premises , . the business being essentially custom jobs for people . Mr . Carson
agreed , adding that half of his business is cabinetry and half is carpentry .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - November 18 , 1981
Mr . Carson stated that he is out more than he is in .
Mr . King , referring to the sketch map , asked who the neighbor is who
® is in the house located to the south of the existing garage . Mr . Carson
stated- that the neighbor is Mr . . Nelson Eddy .
Mr . King asked if there were anyone who wished to be heard . No one
spoke .
Mr . King asked if there had been any variances on this property . Mr .
Cartee stated that there were none to his knowledge . Mr . Cartee asked if
this shop will require any change in the construction of the building at all .
Mr . Carson stated that all he has to do is put up a partition wall . Mr .
Cartee asked if the shop would be heated . Mr . Carson replied that it would
be heated , and added that it is heated now .
Mr . King asked Mr . Carson if he would be occupying two floors . Mr .
Carson replied , no , just one . It was noted that the square footage involved
is 600 , being a portion 20 ' x 30 ' in the south end of the garage .
Mr . King noted the receipt of the following letter from Mr . Frank
Liguori , Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , dated November 13 , 1981 :
" . . . RE : Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239 - 1 and -m of the New York
State General Municipal Law
CASE : Appeal of Nelson Eddy , Bostwick Road
® ( County highway ) .
. . . This will acknowledge the receipt of the proposals for review under
Section 239 -m .
The proposal , as submitted , will have no significant deleterious impact on
intercommunity , county , or state interests . Therefore , no recommendation is
indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to act without
prejudice . "
Mr . King noted that this application is not by the owner ; it is from
Mr . Carson and . a request for variance goes with the land . Mr . King stated
that he saw no easy way to do this , but , perhaps , a special permit might be
appropriate . Mr . King asked Mr . Cartee if he saw this proposal as a suitable
use . Mr . Cartee said that he did and added that no neighbors have made any
complaint and several were notified of this meeting .
MOTION by Mrs . Joan Reuning , seconded by Mr . Henry Aron :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and
hereby does grant a Special Permit to Erik W . Carson , in his name only , for
the operation - of a woodworking shop in an existing structure at 430 Bostwick
Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 32 - 1 - 18 . 2 , as indicated on drawing
submitted this date by said Erik W . Carson and as indicated on the Appeal
Form also submitted this date by said Erik W . Carson ; and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that at such time as the operation by Mr . Carson of
said woodworking shop ceases to exist , the Special Permit hereby granted is
to '- expire ; and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that said Special Permit gran:t. _ . s = sub,j. ect : ta . . review by
this Board .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 5 - November 18 , 1981
There being no further discussion , the Acting - Chairman called for a
® vote
Aye King , Aron , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the matter of the
Nelson Eddy Appeal , Erik W . Carson , applicant , duly closed at 8 : 05 p . m .
APPEAL OF FRANK P . AND DORIS GATCH , APPELLANTS , ADAM GATCH , AS AGENT , FROM
THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO CONDUCT A HOME
OCCUPATION ( BODY SHOP ) IN AN EXISTING GARAGE , WITH GARAGE AREA IN EXCESS OF
200 SQUARE FEET , AT 110 SEVEN . MILE DRIVE , TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 33 - 2 - 5 , ITHACA ,
N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE V , SECTION 19 , PARAGRAPH 2 , OF THE
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE .
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 8 : 06 p . m . . Mr . King read the Notice of Public Hearing
as published . and as noted above , and stated that the property is located in
an R- 30 district .
Mr . Adam Gatch appeared before the Board and stated that the property
is located at 110 Seven Mile Drive and the existing garage measures 25 ' x
25 ' .
Mr . King read from Section 19 , paragraph 2 , as follows : " A customary
home occupation , such as dressmaking , hair dressing , laundering , home cooking ;
carpentry , electrical , and plumbing work or similar manual or mechanical
trade ; operated solely by a resident of the dwelling , provided that no
additional persons not residing on the premises may be employed therein and
that no goods or products are publicly displayed or advertised for sale ,
that there be no outside . storage , and that no noise , dust , disorder , or
objectionable odor is experienced beyond the immediate property where such
use is conducted . The above mechanical trades to be conducted in the base -
ment of the dwelling or ._ in a garage area not to exceed 200 square feet . "
Mr . King noted that the Board- members had received a copy of the
materials submitted by Mr . Gatch . He pointed out that the appeal indicates
that the area of . the garage is 1 , 200 sq . ft . Mr . Gatch said that that was
wrong .. Mr . King noted that 25 ' x 25 ' equals 625 sq . ft . Mr . Gatch stated
that that was correct . . ( The Appeal reads as follows : " . . . The garage would
be used as apart time business only . I work nights for the school district
now and find it almost impossible to maintain a house , pay running bills ,
buy fuel , feed four children , and last but not least , pay the taxes . This
business would be a body shop . The garage and surrounding structures will
not be changed . I am installing anew overhead door and insulation only ,
There will be no outside storage of cars or parts . I will work on one car
at a time , and work alone . There will be no noise or air pollution to
bother the surrounding neighbors . With this description of . the business
are photographs of the property and surrounding area . I have also included
an approximate description of the property borders , adjoining property and
® roads , including maps . The garage is approximately twelve hundred square
feet in area and a variance is requested . ( Sgd . ) Adam L . Gatch " ) ,
Mr . Gatch stated that he works for the School District nights and has
been a body . _ man for 15 years . He stated that he needs supplemental income .
He stated . that he will only work on one car at a time and there would be no
noise pollution and no . air pollution . He stated that there ---will be no change
Zoning Board of Appeals - 6 - November 18 , 1981
to the structure or the surrounding structures .
Mr . King asked what kind of body work Mr . Gatch did . Mr . Gatch stated
that he made minor repairs to dents and painted in the worked areas only .
Mr . Gatch stated that the garage is only big enough for one car at a time .
Mr . King asked Mr . Gatch how he got work . Mr . Gatch replied , by word
of mouth . Mr . Gatch stated that there would be no signs except for what is
required by law .
Mr . King asked if there would be any cars outside . Mr . Gatch said that
there would not .
Mr . Aron asked Mr . Gatch where he has worked . Mr . Gatch replied that
he has been living in California for the past five years , however , he worked
at T - burg Ford , 1971 - 75 , Ronnie ' s Body Shop in Ovid , Zikakis , Bill Cooke ,
and Erie J . Miller . Mr . Gatch stated that his work is only part - time ; he
is a mechanic for the transportation division of the School District .
Mr . Cartee noted that Mr . Lyle Jacobs is present and is a neighbor of
the property in question .
Mr . Jacobs stated that he is a neighbor and he is in favor of seeing
the variance go through . He stated that he has seen some of the work that
Mr . Gatch does . He stated that he is very . well qualified . He stated that
he saw nothing wrong with the location that he has and that he would like to
see the variance go through .
® Mr . King asked Mr . Jacobs how far away he is located . Mr . Jacobs
replied , about 1 , 000 feet west , and added that on the other side is the
Town Highway Barn property .
A gentleman from the floor stated that he would like to ask about the
noise level .
Mr . King asked Mr . Gatch what he anticipated in the way of machinery .
Mr . Gatch replied that about the noisiest is a hammer - - metal against metal .
Mr . Gatch stated that he works nights for the school district so this work
would be done in the daytime .
Mr . Aron stated that most of the noise in this area would be in the
area anyway with cars and trucks and he did not think the noise would be any
louder than what there is right now .
Mr . King asked Mr . Gatch what hours he proposed to work . Mr . Gatch
replied , two or three hours a day , maybe between 2 : 00 and 4 : 00 .
The Board members reviewed again the photographs of the garage and
house .
Mr . Cartee stated that the Town of Ithaca owns the property to the
south and he discussed this matter with the Town Engineer who indicated
that he had no problems with the proposal .
® Mr . King noted that Mr . Gatch does not own the property . Mr . Gatch
stated that he did not , his mother and father do . Mr . King asked if they
( his mother and . father ) lived there . Mr . Gatch replied that they do not ;
they live in Ithaca , he lives there .
Mr . King asked if there were anyone else who wished to speak . No one
Zoning Board of Appeals - 7 - November 18 , 1981
spoke . Mr . King stated that he could not see a variance but a special
® permit could be in order with limitations on the hours of use and subject
to review by the Building Inspector .
MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and
hereby does grant a Special Permit to Mr . Adam Gatch , 110 Seven Mile Drive ,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 2 - 5 , for the operation of a body repair
shop in an existing garage containing 625 sq . ft . located on said property ,
such operation to be carried on during the daytime and only so long as it is
conducted by Mr . Adam Gatch , with such Special Permit grant being subject
to review by the Building Inspector of the Town of Ithaca and / or said Board
of Appeals .
There being no further discussion , the Acting - Chairman called for a
vote .
Aye - King , Aron , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared . to be carried unanimously .
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the matter of the
Gatch Appeal duly closed at 8 : 25 p . m .
APPEAL OF THOMAS AND MARTHA BELL , APPELLANTS , FROM THE DECISION OF THE
® BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMIT FOR WINDOW SIGNAGE AT BELL ' S CONVENIENCE
FOODS , 614 ELMIRA ROAD, TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 4 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMIT IS
DENIED UNDER SECTIONS 5 , 05 - 2 , 5 . 05 - 31 AND 5 . 05 - 5 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA SIGN
LAW .
Acting - Chairman King declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 8 : 26 p . m . It was noted that neither Mr . nor Mrs . Bell
was present , however , the Board members had before them the Bell ' s Appeal
.Form , Sign Permit Application with accompanying letter of explanation and
, description of signage sizes , and excerpts from the Planning Board Minutes
of September 15th and October 20th , 1981 , and two photographs . ( The Bell ' s
Appeal Form reads as follows : " . . . Signs needed to inform the public that we
are open because the reflection of the sunlight against the glass gives the
appearance that the store is dark and closed . The lighted signs lets
everyone know we - are open . They have been there seven years and we feel
they are attractive and do not detract from the building . We do not " clutter "
our windows with weekly special signs . Please refer to previous letter ,
pictures and sign measurements . Thank you . ( Sgd . ) Thomas G . Bell . ( Dated )
11 / 4 / 81 . "
Mr . King cited Section 5 . 05 - 2 of . the Town of Ithaca Sign Law in re
permanent window signs , as follows : " There shall be no more than 1 permanent
window sign per window and a maximum of 2 per enterprise . "
Mr . King asked if the signs in question conform .with the 1972 Sign
Ordinance , adding that , if so , the 1980 Sign Law does not permit the Town
to say that they cannothave them , and , maybe they are legal now .
Mr . Cartee stated that to his knowledge the signs were put in around
1976 or 1977 during the time when the Bells came before the Planning Board
and the Zoning Board for a sign for the ice house .
• Zoning Board of Appeals - 8 - November 18 , 1981
Mr . Aron stated that to the best of his knowledge , the 1972 Sign
Ordinance did not address or cover window signs whatsoever and that is one
® of the major items that the Planning Board was concerned with when it sat
down to talk about a new Sign Law . He stated that the 1980 Sign Law , thus ,
addresses window signage specifically .
Mrs . Reuning stated that she thought the Board should first determine
if it has any right to determine what the Bells can do - - whether the signs
in question are non - conforming or not .
Mr . Aron stated that the Board can talk about that but what bothered
him the most is that the applicants are not present nor had they appeared
before . the Planning Board ,
Mr . King commented that maybe they - are exercising their consitutional
right to not appear before a body which has no jurisdiction and they may be
right .
Mr . Aron stated that that may be right but he felt very strongly about
compliance with ordinances where they apply . Mrs . Reuning stated that she
agreed .
Mr . King stated that he questioned whether the Board has them properly
before it in the first place , adding that the signs have been there ,
according to Mr . Bell ' s letter , for seven years . Mr . King stated that he
would like to have an opinion from the Town Counsel to advise us if this
matter is properly before us at all . - - whether this Board even has the power
to assert to require them to bring their signs into conformity with the
1980 Sign Law in view of the fact that the signs existed before the 1980
Sign Law was adopted .
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals refer and
hereby does refer the matter of window signage at Bell ' s Convenience Foods ,
614 Elmira Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 -33 - 3 - 2 . 4 , to the Town
Attorney to obtain his opinion as to the jurisdiction of said Board of
Appeals , especially . in view of Section 8 . 05 - 2 of the Town- of Ithaca Sign Law ,
to require these pre - existing permanent window signs ( which antedate said
. 1980 Sign Law by five years or so ) to be brought into compliance with the
1980 Sign Law ; and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals shall
take up this matter again after it receives the Attorney ' s opinion .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - King , Aron , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
® Acting - Chairman King declared the matter of the Bell ' s window signage
appeal duly adjourned at 8 : 45 p . m .
RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN BOARD . - - MEMBER , ZONING BOARD_ -OF APPEALS , - FIVE -YEAR.
TERM COMMENCING JANUARY 1 , 1982 .
Acting - Chairman King stated that another matter to be discussed by the
Board at this meeting is the expiration of the term of one of its members . .
. . Zoning Board of Appeals - 9 - November 18 , 1981
Mr '. King stated that Mr . Henry Aron was appointed by the Town Board to fill
the unexpired term of Mr . Peter Francese , i . e . , until December 31 , 1981 . He
® noted that a term of office on the Board of Appeals is five years . Mr . King
stated that he would like to see this Board recommend to the Town Board the
continuation of Mr . Aron ' s appointment - - if he is willing to serve .
Mr . Aron thanked Mr . King and stated that he would be very pleased to
continue as a member of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals .
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals recommend and
hereby does . recommend to the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca the appointment
of Mr . Henry Aron to a full term of membership upon the Zoning Board of
Appeals of the Town of Ithaca , such term being five years and to commence
January 1 , 1982 .
There being no further discussion , the Acting - Chairman called for a vote .
Aye - King , Aron , Reuning .
Nay - None .
. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Acting - Chairman King declared the November 18 , 1981 , meeting
® of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of . Appeals duly adjourned at 9 : 00 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Zoning Board of Appeals ,
Town of Ithaca
Edward W . King , Acting - Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Ithaca