HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1981-12-17 a
o
® TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DECEMBER 17 , 1981
The - Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in Special Session
on Thursday , December 17 , 1981 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ,
Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 00 p . m . °
PRESENT : Henry Aron , Edward W . King , Joan G . Reuning , Nancy M'.
Fuller ( Secretary ) .
ALSO PRESENT : George J . Vignaux , Frederick Agard , Hildegard Agard ,
Alfred DiGiacomo , Mary DiGiacomo , Jeremy House ( WTKO ) .
Neither the Chairman nor the Vice Chairman being present , the
Secretary opened the meeting at 7 : 15 p . m .
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals appoint and hereby
does appoint Henry Aron as Acting Chairman for this meeting .
Aye - King , Reuning , Aron .
Nay - None .
® Acting Chairman Aron called the meeting to order 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
December 9 , 1981 , and December 12 , 1981 , respectively , together with
the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the
various neighbors of the property under discussion , upon the Tompkins
County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the Appellant on December 9 ,
1981 .
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR REHEARING OF THE APPEAL OF THE COUNTRY
CLUB = OF ITHACA FOR PERMIT TO ERECT A FENCE GREATER THAN SIX FEET IN
HEIGHT .
Acting Chairman Aron opened discussion of the above - noted matter
at 7 : 17 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as
posted and published and as noted above .
Mr . King stated that the first order of business seems to be that
this Board , as a sitting Board , vote on the question of a rehearing on
the matter of the Country Club fence . Mr . King stated that , as he
understood it , the Board would have to vote unanimously , to rehear the
case and if the Board did rehear it would then require a unanimous
vote of those members of the Board present to take any action for any
change in the situation . Mr . King stated that one of the first
considerations in deciding whether the Board wants to rehear the case
® is to find out what the Appellant has done' on acting on the variance
from October 21 , 1981 .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 2 - December 17 , 1981
® Mr . George Vignaux , General Manager of the County Club , spoke
from the floor and stated that , under the permit which he received , he
investigated more thoroughly possible ways of erecting the fence ,
however , he would do nothing about building the fence until he spoke
to the neighbors . Mr . Vignaux stated that he has told them that he
was talking about the purchase of land which would allow the Club to
alter the driving range and which would mean that there would be no
need for the fence . Mr . Vignaux stated that it was at this point that
he was informed that his permit had been set aside .
Mr . King asked if the Country Club had purchased materials for
the fence . Mr . Vignaux stated that he has purchased nothing , however ,
the materials are available to him .
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals proceed
and hereby does proceed to rehear the entire matter of the Country
Club fence .
There being no further discussion , the Acting Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - Aron , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
REHEARING , ON CORRECTED NOTICE , OF THE APPEAL OF THE COUNTRY CLUB OF
ITHACA , APPELLANT , GEORGE J . VIGNAUX , GENERAL MANAGER , AS AGENT , FROM
THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO
ERECT A FENCE GREATER THAN SIX ( 6 ) FEET IN HEIGHT ALONG A PORTION OF
THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE OF SAID COUNTRY CLUB OF ITHACA PROPERTY KNOWN
AS 189 PLEASANT GROVE ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO , 6 - 68 - 1 - 1 . 2 .
PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII , SECTION 65 , AND ARTICLE XIV ,
SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE .
Acting Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the
above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 20 p . m . and read aloud from the
Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Acting Chairman Aron asked Mr . Vignaux about his intent as to the
fence . Mr . Vignaux responded that , if they should go ahead with the
fence , they would erect it with a maximum of three telephone poles ,
possibly on two telephone poles , with cable strung over the top of the
poles and then on an angle to two poles on the ground . Mr . Vignaux
stated that there would be a plastic type mesh , manufactured for golf
driving ranges specifically , hanging from the cable to the ground .
Mr . Vignaux stated that this could be dropped in the off - season ,
leaving only the two or three poles visible .
® Mr . King asked what the total length of the fence would be , with
Mr . Vignaux responding , approximately 250 feet long by 30 feet high ,
and adding that , in fact , they could probably drop it to 28 feet or
Zoning Board of Appeals - 3 - December 17 , 1981
so , and noting that the mesh is available in 25 - foot lengths . Acting
Chairman Aron asked what the necessity of the fence being there by the
driving range is , noting that the driving range is parallel to the
backs of the houses . Mr . Vignaux stated that there is no area for the
driving range , other than that now , adding that they are actively
pursuing additional land . Mr . Vignaux stated that they have talked to
Cornell to purchase fallow swamp land , however , they have indicated
that they do not own it and they may turn it back to the State and
have it declared public land and put up for auction . Mr . Vignaux
reiterated that this area was really and truly swamp land , but it
could be another golf hole with a water hazard and that would free up
the ninth hole . Mrs . Reuning wondered how long the Club has had the
driving range where it is , with Mr . Vignaux responding that he did not
know . Mr . King asked if Mr . Vignaux had any idea , with Mr . Vignaux
responding , twenty years at least .
Acting Chairman Aron noted that this was a public hearing and
asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak .
Mrs . Hildegard Agard , 1023 Hanshaw Road , spoke from the floor and
stated that they bought their property in 1966 and it was started
after they bought their property . Acting Chairman Aron asked Mrs .
Agard if she had voiced an opinion that she was not interested in it
at that time . Mrs . Agard indicated that she had not . Mr . King asked
when that might have been , with Mrs . Agard responding , 1967 or 1968 .
® Mr . Alfred DiGiacomo , 1025 Hanshaw Road , spoke from the floor and
presented a sketch to the Board showing Hanshaw Road , four houses on
Hanshaw Road , including 1023 and 1025 , the practice range , the Club
House , the 9th hole , and 30 - foot high evergreens . [ Said sketch
attached hereto as Exhibit A . ] Mr . DiGiacomo stated that the houses
getting most of the balls are Agard ' s and himself . Mr . DiGiacomo
thanked the Board for letting him and Mrs . Agard speak to them
tonight . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that the practice range parallels
Hanshaw Road and lies along the group of four houses that were once
Cornell property . Mr . DiGiacomo noted that he was at No . 1025 , and
adjacent to him is a row of high evergreens which prevent others from
being in the way of balls . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that he bought his
place in June . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that he was not fully convinced
that the fence is going to protect them from the high flying balls and
it was his contention that the erection of the fence , which neither of
us wants , neither the Country Club nor us , will do any good ,
particularly since the balls are also in his front yard .
Mr . DiGiacomo now presented a sketch to the Board [ attached
hereto as Exhibit B ] in the same format as the first -sketch , but with
the addition of lines indicating the path taken by balls hit from the
practice range . Mr . DiGiacomo described the beautiful view which they
have of the Country Club ,
Mr . Fred Agard , 1023 Hanshaw Road , spoke from the floor and
® stated that he was fully expecting to attend the original hearing
[ October 21 , 1981 ] , but an intuition had told him to leave a note with
Mr . DiGiacomo just in case it was held in October which it was and he
Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - December 17 , 1981
® may have known about it . Mr . Agard then proceeded to read his note
[ attached hereto as Exhibit C ] . Mr . Agard stated that the last point
in his note - - " ( 3 ) The fence , if authorized , might well lead the
Country Club to believe they had solved the problem and therefore to
postpone action toward the true solution , which would be to relocate
the practice range where it is no longer constituted a threat to
neighboring residential properties . " - - Mr . Vignaux has spoken to
which may mitigate this point , nonetheless , his points stand .
Mr . King asked that the Secretary enter the exhibits into the
record . [ Entered . ]
Mr . Vignaux stated , in response to the comments that have been
made by his neighbors , he thought the Club is on record already as
saying that it does not intend to make a permanent fence out there .
Mr . Vignaux stated that this is a temporary solution , reiterating that
the term was temporary which necessitated review in 1982 , so , they are
not sticking up a fence and walking away from it . Mr . Vignaux stated
that he wished to point out that the design of the fence is such as to
not obstruct view , adding that he has been in the living room of the
Agards which overlooks the existing fence , and further adding that the
focus is carried out , however , from the Golf Course the poles can be
seen . Mr . Vignaux stated that he believed there would be no golf
balls in the yard and little limitation of light , but no view
restriction . Mr . Vignaux stated that they are actively looking to
® alleviate the problem in the long term . Referring to Exhibit B , Mr .
Vignaux stated that he believed it was a little slanted , at first
glance , because it gives an impression that all of the balls go to the
left . Mr . Vignaux stated that in his letter to the Board of Appeals
of November 19 , 1981 , [ attached hereto as Exhibit D ] , Mr . DiGiacomo
stated that he has collected over 1 , 500 balls which have landed on his
property since he moved into his house in June . Mr . Vignaux stated
that the fence would eliminate 90 % of these errant balls . Mr . Vignaux
stated that the Club could plant evergreens and allow them to reach 30
feet or 40 feet in height and double - row them , but then there would be
no view at all , but that would stop the balls . Mr . Vignaux stated
that if it were the Club ' s desire to just stop the balls , it could do
that , however , this is the best solution on a temporary basis .
Acting Chairman Aron asked Mr . Vignaux what made - him decide to
put up a fence , adding , were there complaints by the Agards or the
DiGiacomos , or anyone else who complained about personal injury , or
damage , or balls on their properties . Mr . Vignaux stated that the
complaints were primarily by the Agards and the DiGiacomos , adding
that Mr . Ierardi , 1021 Hanshaw Road , does play golf and he does get
some balls , but he does not seem to care . Mr . Vignaux stated that
from the tee to the Davids ' house , 1019 Hanshaw Road , there are no
balls in their yard , adding that the fifth house down , is protected by
high trees and there have been no complaints so far from them .
Acting Chairman Aron asked if there had been any claims for
® property damage , with Mr . Vignaux responding that there have been
claims from the Agards which he has paid as a good neighbor .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 5 - December 17 , 1981
® Mr . DiGiacomo stated that they have had one ball strike the house
and do damage to the siding , they have had the house surrounded by
balls and on the weekend there are fifteen or twenty in their yard and
in the bushes . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that they have a large blue
spruce which stops many and a large oak tree which stops many . Mr .
DiGiacomo presented everybody with a golf ball from his yard .
Mrs . Reuning wondered if people walk into the yard , with Mr .
DiGiacomo responding , no . Mr . Agard stated that the people playing
the ninth hole , if they slice , they come and get it .
Acting Chairman Aron asked if anyone else had any comments .
There being none , Acting Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing at
7 : 40 p . m .
Mr . King noted that " these " are yellow range balls and asked if
that was usual . Mr . Vignaux responded , yes , adding that they are
marked to delineate them from the other balls in play .
Acting Chairman Aron opened the Public Hearing again .
Mr . King , referring to the balls that have hit the house , asked
if they were the marked balls - - the range balls , with Mr . DiGiacomo
responding , yes . Mr . King asked Mr . DiGiacomo whether he would like
to see thirty - foot high trees or a twenty - foot high picture of balls ,
® with Mr . DiGiacomo responding that he did not think either will work .
Mr . King wondered where the fence would go . The Secretary showed
Mr . King , and the Board , the drawing submitted by Mr . Vignaux at the
October 21st hearing . Mr . Vignaux suggested that the Board should
grant him 250 feet from the middle of the property line of 1021
Hanshaw to the middle of the property line of 1025 Hanshaw , that is ,
approximately 250 feet in length as an expansion of the placement .
Mr . King asked if Mr . Vignaux thought Exhibit B accurately describes
the situation , with Mr . Vignaux responding , no , and adding that there
are four or five a year maybe in the area of the heavy lines
[ referring to the sketch ] . Mr . Vignaux stated that the neighbors
described the situation very well as to trees and bushes , adding that ,
obviously , the protection is there . Mr . Vignaux stated that they
could put up trees such as evergreens and Lombardy poplars . Mr .
DiGiacomo wondered why they would consider trees if they are actively
pursuing the purchase of more land . Mrs . DiGiacomo asked if Mr .
Vignaux really wishes a fence or would the fence be temporary until
October 1983 ,
Acting Chairman Aron noted that Mr . Vignaux had stated that the
Country Club is actively pursuing the purchase of property . Mr .
Vignaux stated that they have approached Cornell University and they
have been receptive to advising them of the land , adding that they are
progressing on that . Mr . Vignaux stated that the alternative to the
path that they are progressing on now would be someone in the State
® Legislature endorsing a bill declaring it public land and then selling
it to the Country Club . Mr . Vignaux commented that they are plodding
along with making an offer to purchase . Acting Chairman Aron
Zoning Board of Appeals - 6 - December 17 , 1981
asked if they have made that offer . Mr . Vignaux stated that they have
had oral discussions with the Ag School , adding that they will be
talking with the Dean of the Ag School . Mr . Vignaux stated that they
would offer to have- the land surveyed for the Ag School , adding that
they provide a survey if the State declares it surplus land , and
further adding that the State Assessor assesses it . Mr . Vignaux
stated that Cornell would demand from them an intent to purchase prior
to their divesting themselves of it , adding that they are going one
step at a time . Acting Chairman Aron asked if that will take place
before their golf season starts , with Mr . Vignaux responding , no way ,
and adding that , if they accomplish this , they will have to put a hole
in there , and there would be the matter of the environmental review .
Mr . King asked Mr . Vignaux what this fence would cost for 250
feet . Mr . Vignaux added the following figures up in his head - - $ 250e
erection cost ; poles and anchors $ 200 . a pole unless they replace the
poles plus trucking , equals $ 600 . ; approximately $ 500 . for material ,
for a total of , say , $ 1 , 600 , on estimating at this point . Mr . King
wondered if that would be more than chicken wire . Mr . Vignaux stated
that it would be in the same range , but it would be permanent - - this
is not .
Mr . Agard stated that it seemed quite totally irrelevant to
discuss costs it seemed the fence going up is what is relevant . Mr .
Agard stated that he would like to make one other point , that is , if
there were to be a fence put up unless it were to be exactly on the
property it would be useless , adding that a person ' s fence is not on
the property line ; it is six feet or seven feet inside . Mr . Agard
stated that , also , their housekeeping is deplorable at this time . Mr .
Agard stated that he was also concerned about whether there would be
any way to get behind a 250 - foot fence and mow .
Mr . King asked if the fence netting would go clear through to the
ground , adding , did Mr . Vignaux see a need to put the fencing right to
the ground . Mr . Vignaux responded , probably . Mr . King asked if there
have been any injuries from this range - - that is , people being hurt .
Mr . Vignaux indicated that he knew of no injuries to the neighbors .
Mr . King noted that the fence would be inside , south of the Club ' s
north property line , and asked by how many feet . Mr . Vignaux
responded that that would be by as many feet as would make their
neighbors happy , and spoke of 7 feet into the ground or a 5 - foot
leeway . Mr . King pointed out that the previous record shows an 8 - foot
inset , and asked about mowing . Mr . Vignaux stated that this would be
no problem because with this type of mesh you just roll up the fence ,
adding that they use a gang mower , and further adding that , insofar as
the Agards ' point , he mows this way in his gardening chores , and they
just lift this up and sweep under .
Acting Chairman Aron asked if there were any further questions .
Mr . DiGiacomo stated that , with reference to anyone being
injured , one time when his grandchildren were visiting they were near
the oak tree and a ball landed right where they were standing .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 7 - December 17 , 1981
Acting Chairman Aron closed the Public Hearing ,
Mr . Vignaux wondered why someone whose grandchild was almost hit
by a ball would not want a fence .
Acting Chairman Aron asked if there were anything more from the
members of the Board .
Mr . King asked Mr . Vignaux how far north of the Club ' s north line
the backs of these houses are , with Mr . Vignaux responding , probably
back 70 to 75 feet . Mr . DiGiacomo stated that it is 100 feet from the
rear of the house to the Country Club property line and they are all
about the same .
Mr . King commented that the fence would be 110 feet south of the
south line of these house walls . Mr . King noted that Mr . Vignaux had
said that this type of mesh is even more invisible than steel . Mr .
Vignaux agreed , adding , especially in the winter when it is not there .
Mrs . Reuning stated that part of the Board ' s problem is speculation as
to how effective the fence would be , adding that they really cannot
tell until it is tried out . Mr . King asked where the present fence
is , with Mr . Vignaux responding , in the rear of the Agard property - -
four feet high or so .
Mr . King stated that he thought this is a much better solution ,
® that is , removable netting , eight feet at least inside their property
line . Mr . King noted that the poles would be there , but they are
everywhere . Mr . King asked if the mower would fit , with Mr . Vignaux
responding , yes . Mrs . Reuning stated that she thought it is very
helpful for the Board to know the cost because if they put in a lot of
money they are more likely not to remove it .
There appearing to be no further comments , Acting Chairman Aron
asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion .
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant
and hereby does grant the special permit to erect the fence as now
proposed , being a removable plastic mesh fence , strung between not
more than three poles , extending not more than 250 feet in length from
about the centre of the property at 1021 Hanshaw Road ( south of that
property ) , easterly about 250 feet to the centre of 1025 Hanshaw Road ,
and further , that it be at least 8 feet south of the north line of the
Appellant ' s property , that it be not more than 30 feet high , and that
it be a temporary permit to be reviewed in two years from the date of
this grant , at which time , if the Country Club has been able to
purchase more land to change the driving range , the fence would then
be removed .
vote . There being no further discussion , the Acting Chair called for a
•
Aye - Aron , King , Reuning .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 8 - December 17 , 1981
® Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Acting Chairman Aron declared the matter of the Country Club
fence duly closed at 8 : 15 p . m .
NON-AGENDA ITEM WITH RESPECT TO THE ZWERMAN PROPERTY AT 1462
SLATERVILLE ROAD ,
The Board members discussed the request by Town Councilwoman
Raffensperger to review the approval and limits granted to Mr . and
Mrs . Zwerman of 1462 Slaterville Road granted by the Board , on December
5 , 1979 , with respect to the display and limited sales of Hummel
figurines . [ See Exhibits E and F attached hereto . ]
MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that it be and hereby is the interpretation of the Town
of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals that the little flyer which the
Board has been shown from the Zwermans , 1462 Slaterville Road , does
not violate the terms of the Board ' s decision on December 5 , 1979 ,
regarding there being no display or advertising of goods for sale on
the premises .
® There being no further discussion , the Acting Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - Aron , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Acting Chairman Aron declared the matter of the review of the
Zwerman matter duly closed at 8 : 20 p . m .
CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD WITH RESPECT TO
CHAIRMAN OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND CONSIDERATION OF THE
ELECTION OF ITS VICE CHAIRMAN .
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 that Mr . Henry
Aron be appointed as its Chairman for the year 1982 .
There being no further discussion , the Acting Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - King , Reuning , Aron .
Nay - $None .
® The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 9 - December 17 , 1981
® MOTION by Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning ,
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals elect
and hereby does elect Mr . Jack Hewett at its First Vice Chairman and
Mr . Edward Austen as its Second Vice Chairman for the year 1982 .
There being no further discussion , the Acting Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - King , Reuning , Aron .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Acting Chairman Aron declared the December 17 , 1981
meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly adjourned
at 8 : 30 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals .
Henry Aron , Acting Chairman
c�
I �
I
C
w lu l
,N Q
U
O \ Q
W
Go
h
1
i
is
i
i
/ ' r
EXHIBIT A
i
I �
� 1
j
_
w
O
tv
D
/N Q
, . W
� i V
d ' L Q
- , Q
, i
Ul
co
07 _
m
s
EXHIBIT B
October 3 , 1981
To whom it may concern ;
If between the dates of October ti and October 27 , 1981 , the
Town of Ithaca holds a nearing on the Country Club ' s request to
erect a high fence between .their property and " ours at 1023 Hanshaw
Road , we shall be out of town . and unable to present our arguments
at the meeting . If present , we the undersigned would make the
following three points in opposition to authorizing said fence :
( 1 ) The fence would be unsightly and would therefore detract
from the , market value of our property for any potential purchaser
who appreciates the view to the south ;
( 2 ) The fence would not even succeed in screening out the high , _
vicious hook shots off the practice tee which have been constantly
endangering our property , . life . and limb ever since the range was
located where it is ;
( 3 ) The fence , if authorized , might well lead the Country Club '
to believe they had solved the problem and therefore to postpone
action toward the true solution , which would be to relocate the
practice range where it no longer constituted a threat to
neighboring resiaential properties .
Signed
EXHIBIT C
r C
1025 Hanshaw Road two
Y
OP �r Ithaca , NY 14850 4
® IM November 19 , 1981
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Ithaca V �
126 E . Seneca St .
Ithaca , NY 14850
Att : N,r . Jack Hewitt , Chairman
///Z $//S/
Gentlemen :
We have been the owners of record of the property at V41" 'U�
ot
1025 Hanshaw Road since June 1981 .
The . notice of the October 21 Zoning hearing was addressed
to the former owners of the - property and was apparently
forwarded to their new address . The former owner ' s
were Louise and Clement Rosetti ,
The notice stated that the Country Club of Ithaca was
appealing the decision of the building inspector denying
a0building permit " to . erect a fence , a fence greater than
six feet at the north property- line at 1011 Hanshaw Road . "
This innocent sounding statement probably would® not have aroused our interest as a fence at 1011 Hanshaw Road would
not have disturbed us .
However , duringrecent conversations with Mr . Cartee we
discovered that the fence is to be erected along their
north property line behind 1025 Harishaw . road and not 1011
Hanshaw Road as stated in the zoning board noticed If
this is indeed the true situation we are quite disturbed by
the decision of the Board and are therefore serving you .
with this notice of complaint ,
Our complaint is ; that , the 30 fte fence will . destroy - the
view from the back yard , which is one of the features of this
house , that the fence itself will be an esthetic eyesore ,
and will serve to lower the value of our property .
Furthermore , it will not serve the best interest of either
the Country Club or ourselves as erecting a fence along our
north property line will not solve the . problem of hook shots
off the practice tee which in some instances have landed on
our front lawn . Others have come close to the house , one
actually striking the rear of the house . These balls were
not screened out by our high trees on our property ,
The range has prevented us from 'enjoying free and easy use
of our property living in constant anxiety because of incoming
balls .
EXHIBIT D continued . . . .
- 2 -
® We have collected over 1500 balls which have landed on
our
property since we moved in .
We can illustrate graphically to the Board why we believe
a 30 fte high fence along our back property line will not
work .
Also , the fence once installed , whether it works or not ,
may lead the Country Club and others to believe that the problem
has, been solved , whereas the true solution is to cease the
use of - the non conforming practice range and relocate it to
a place that will not constitute a hazard .
In accordance with Section 267 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town
Law we respectfully request a re - hearing on this matter so that
we may present our side of the case to the Board for their
consideration .
We would appreciate an early reply on this matter .
Thank you for your attention to this . matter .
Very truly yours ,
`Al ed DiGi omo
Mary DiGiacomo
cct pavid Gersh
✓Noel Desch
Jack Hewitt
S
EXHIBIT D
§ 267. Board of appeals
Appointment of members; compensa- I . Such town board shall appoint aboard of appeals consisting of five
lion, staff, expenses members, shall designate its chairman and may also provide for compensa-
tion to be paid to said members, experts, clerks and a secretary and provide for
such other expenses as may be necessary and proper, not exceeding in all the
appropriations that may be made by the town board for such board of
Member of town board precluded from appeals. No person who is a member of the town board shall be eligible for
membership membership on such board of appeals. Of the members of the board first .
Terms of office, additional members appointed, one shall hold office for the term of one year, one for the term of
two years, one for the term of three years, one for the term of four years, one
for the term of five years from and after his appointment; provided, however,
that such town board may, by resolution, increase the number of members of
the board to seven, and provide for their compensation and thereafter such
additional members shall be first appointed for terms of two and four years
respectively.
Their successors, including such additional members as maybe appointed
by the town board, shall be appointed for the term of five years from and after
Filling Of zParanry the expiration of the terms of their predecessors in office. If a vacancy shall
occur otherwise than by expiration of term, it shall be filled by the town
board by appointment for the unexpired term. The town board shall have the
Removal of member power to remove any member of the board for cause and after public hearing.
Meetings All meetings of the board of appeals shall be held at the call of the chairman
and at such other times as such board may determine. Such chairman, or in
his absence the acting chairman, may administer oaths and compel ,the
attendance of witnesses. All meetings of such board shall be open to the
® public. Such board shall keep minutes Qf its proceedings, showing the vote of
each member upon every question, or if absent or failing to vote, indicating
such fact, and shall also keep records of its examinations and other official
Filing of decisions actions. Every rule, regulation, every amendment or repeal thereof, and every
order, requirement, decision or determination of the board shall immediately .
be filed in the office of the town clerk and shall be a public record.
Powers and duties of board of appeals 2. Such board of appeals shall hear and decide appeals from and review
any order, requirement, decision or determination made by an adminis-
trative official charged with the enforcement of any ordinance adopted
pursuant to this article. It shall also hear and decide all matters referred to it
or , upon which it is required to pass under any such ordinance. The
Majority vote concurring vote of a majority of the members of the board shall be necessary
to reverse any order, requirement, decision or determination of any such
administrative official, or to decide in favor of the applicant any matter upon
which it is required to pass under any such ordinance or to effect any
variation in such ordinance. Such appeal may be taken by any person
aggrieved, or by an officer, department, board or bureau of the town,
Appeal procedure 3. Such appeal shall betaken within such time as shall be prescribed by
the board of appeals by general rule, by filing with the officer from whom the
appeal is taken and with the board of appeals a notice of appeal, specifying
the grounds thereof. The officer from whom the appeal is taken shall
forthwith transmit to the board all the papers constituting the record upon
which the action appealed from was taken.
Stay of proceedings, except if life or 4. An appeal stays all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed
property is imperiled from, unless the officer from whom the appeal is taken certifies to the board
of appeals, after the notice of appeal. shall have been filed with him, that by
reason of facts stated in the certificate a stay, would, in his opinion, cause
imminent peril to life or property, in which case proceedings shall not be
stayed otherwise than by a restraining order which may be granted by the
board of appeals or by a court of record on application, on notice to the
officer from whom the appeal is taken and on due cause shown.
® Notice and hearing 5. The board of appeals shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the
appeal or other matter referred to it and give public notice thereof by the
publication in the official paper of a notice of such hearing, at least five days
prior to the date thereof, and shall , at least five days before such hearing, mail
30 EXHIBIT D
notices thereof to the , parties, and to the regional state park commission
having jurisdiction over.any state park or parkway within five hundred feet
of the property affected by such appeal, and shall decide the same within sixty
days after the final hearing. Upon the hearing, any party may appear in
Action by board person or by agent or by attorney. The board of appeals may reverse or affirm,
wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or
determination appealed from and shall make such order, requirement,
decision or determination as in its opinion ought to be made in the premises
and to that end shall have all the powers of the officer from whom the appeal
is taken . Where there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the
way of carrying out the strict letter of such ordinances, the board of appeals
Power to grant variances — criteria shall have the . power in passing upon appeals, to vary or modify the
application of any of the regulations or provisions of such ordinance relating
to the use, construction or alteration of buildings or structures, or the use of
land, so that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, public safety and
welfare secured and substantial justice done.
6. Upon motion initiated by any member and adopted by. the unanimous
vote of the members present, but not less than a majority of all the members,
Rehearing the board of appeals shall review at a rehearing held upon notice given as
upon an original hearing, any order, decision or determination of the board
not previously reviewed. Upon such re-hearing, and provided it shall then
appear that the rights vested prior thereto in persons acting in good faith in
reliance upon the order, decision or determination reviewed will not be
prejudiced thereby, the board may, upon the concurring vote of all of the
members then present, reverse, modify or annul its original order, decision or
determination. ,
® 7. Any person or persons,.jointly or severally aggrieved by any decision of
the board of appeals or any officer, depattment, board or bureau of the town,
Appeal to Supreme Court from decision may - apply to the supreme court for review by a proceeding under article
•,l board seventy-eight of the civil practice law and rules. Such proceeding shall be
Time limit for appeal instituted within thirty days after the filing of a decision in the office of the
town clerk. The court may take evidence or appoint a referee to take such
evidence as it may direct and report the same with his findings of fact and
conclusions of law, if it shall appear that testimony is necessary for the
proper disposition of the matter. The court at special term shall itself dispose
of the cause on the merits, determining all questions which may be presented
for determination.
Costs 8. Costs shall not be allowed against the board of appeals unless it shall
appear to the court that it acted with gross negligence or in bad faith or with
malice in making the decision appealed from.
9. All issues in any proceeding under this section shall have preference
over all other civil actions and proceedings.
10. If upon the hearing at a special term of the supreme court, it shall
appear to the court that testimony is necessary for the proper disposition of '
Appointment of referee to hear and the matter, it may takeevidence or appoint a referee to take such evidence as it
report may direct and report the same to the court with his findings of fact and
conclusions of law, which shall constitute a part of the proceedings upon
which the determination of the court shal l bemade. The court may reverse or
affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the decision brought up for review.
f
EXHIBIT D
• 31
i
_ - s.Vull, �; bl/ ill u U1 t, �./ YGul � ^ .l — V . 1. VUG1 tel , lyiSl
Vice- Chairman Austen declared the MOTION to be carried unanimously .
Vice -Chairman Austen declared the matter of the Appeal of Leo Deeb duly
closed at 7 : 50 p . m .
APPEAL OF THE COUNTRY CLUB OF ITHACA , APPELLANT , GEORGE J . VIGNAUX , GENERAL
MANAGER , AS . AGENT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A
BUILDING PERMIT TO ERECT A FENCE GREATER THAN SIX ( 6 ) . FEET IN HEIGHT AT THE
NORTH PROPERTY LINE AT 1011 HANSHAW ROAD , TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 71 - 7- 1 , ITHACA ,
N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XIII , SECTION 65 , AND ARTICLE XIV ,
SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE .
Vice - Chairman Austen declared the Public Hearing in the above- noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 50 p . m . and invited Mr . George Vignaux to speak to
the Board .
Mr . Vignaux stated - that the appeal is self ^ explanatory , as noted on the
Appeal Form as submitted under date of September 23 , 1981 , a copy of which
with attached - drawing each Board member had received with his / her Agenda ,
and which reads as follows :
flee . A potentially hazardous situation exists along the north side of the
driving range of the Country Club of Ithaca , New York in that persons hitting
practice balls from Rest to Easton said range occasionally misdirect balls
over the property line and onto the property of our neighbors . Extending the
existing fenceeboth in length and height will preclude said errant balls from
crossing into our neighbors ' properties where they might cause damage to
W
ersons or property . In the interests of our neighbors ' safety and the
eace of mind of them as well as that of the Club ' s membership , we respect -
fully request that this appeal be affirmed . "
Mr . Vignaux . described the " driving range '.' or practice tee and its
proximity to five private properties . He stated that balls do go into the
property of nearby owners and so , last year they put up a 4 - 5 ' high fence ,
80 ' long , and that helped , but , it does not help those balls on the fly .
He stated that if they erected a 28 - 30 ' high fence it would work and they
are so proposing utilizing telephone poles and a heavier gauge wire . He
stated that this would protect their neighbors , adding that they have a fear
of injuring someone . He stated that they are also exploring other avenues
for a possible relocation of their driving range , but that takes time ,
however , they are actively exploring that . He . stated that the proposed
fencing would be a big help in this situation on a short term basis - - one ,
two , three years or so .
Mr . Austen inquired if any of the houses have a separation from the
range . Mr . Vignaux stated that some have fences , some have trees , some
have bushes , some have evergreens . He stated that they would still be able
to see the golf course though it will not be very beautiful .
Mr . Austen asked if there were anyone from the public who wished to be
heard on this matter . No one spoke .
Mr . Aron inquired as to the length of the driving range . Mr . Vignaux
described the siting of the driving range and stated that the Club rules
allow the use of irons only and the fencing would help when persons hook
x their shots . Mr . Aron asked what kind of fence would be used . Mr . Vignaux
PQ stated that it would be like a heavy gauge chicken wire . Mr . Aron wondered
why the balls go that way from the practice tee and why a 30 - foot fence
would be needed . Mr . Aron confessed that he was not a golfer and so he
hoped that Mr . Vignaux would not mind his questions . Mr . Vignaux stated
that when one hooks his shot it soars off to the left and also when one
hits the ball off the heel of the club it scoots off to the left . Mr ,
Vignaux stated that the wire is vi
rtually invisible . Mr . Aron asked if it
till hold a ball . Mr . Vignaux stated , yes , absolutely , it being of welded
wire . Mr . Aron asked how . far apart the telephone poles will be . Mr . Vignaux
stated that there will be approximately three poles and then guy wires . Mr .
Aron asked where the present fence is located . Mr . Vignaux stated that it is
about 8 feet inside the property line and added that he did not want the
fence on the property line . Mr . Aron inquired as . to what relocating the
driving range . means . Mr . Vignaux stated that they are hoping to purchase
more land which would permit such a relocation . Mr . Aron stated then that
the proposed fencing might be termed " temporary " . Mr . Vignaux stated that
that was correct , but he would term it " long- term temporary " . Mr . Vignaux
stated that they have no guarantees that they will be able to acquire the
property that they hope to acquire .
Mrs . Reuning stated that she felt that this is for the protection of
the neighbors and no one is here to oppose and it may be temporary . Mr .
Austen asked the Secretary to read the list of those notified , as follows :
' 1 . George J . Vignaux , General Manager 6 . Reha J . Loosli
The Country Club of Ithaca 406 S . W . 40th Street
189 Pleasant Grove Road Gainesville , Florida 32607
Ithaca , NY 14850 7 , Robert and Zetta Sprole
2 . Michael and Betty David 630 Highland Road
1019 Hanshaw Road Ithaca , NY 14850
Ithaca , NY 14850 8 . Salvatore Indelicato
� 3 . Philip Ierardi Grand Central Avenue
1021 Hanshaw Road Horseheads , NY 14845
Ithaca , NY 14850 9 . George Gibian
4 . Hildegard Agard 311 Roat Street
1023 Hanshaw Road Ithaca , NY 14850
Ithaca , NY 14850 10 . Frank R . Liguori , P . E .
5 . Clement & Louise Rosetti Commissioner of Planning
1025 Hanshaw Road Tompkins County Department of
Ithaca , NY 14850 Planning
128 . East - Buffalo Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Mr . Cartee stated that he did see golf balls in the neighbors ' proper -
ties , and added that he thought it should be provided with a fence , and
stated that he commended the Country Club for proposing this .
Mrs . Reuning stated that this kind of wire does not offer an eyesore .
Mr . Aron asked Mr . Cartee if he had heard any complaints from the persons in
the area . Mr . Cartee stated that some months ago , Mr . Ierardi called him
to say that he had heard the Country Club was going to put up a fence and
he ( Ierardi ) said . that balls were coming into his yard and he wanted to be
told of a request for a fence . Mr . Cartee pointed out that Mr . Ierardi was
notified by mail of this meeting , but he did not appear .
Mr . Vignaux stated that Mr . Agard did have a window that he. claimed was
® broken by a golf ball , adding that the Club did fix the window .
Vice - Chairman Austen asked if there were anyone else who wished to
speak - - Board members or public . There was no one who spoke .
EXHIBIT D
YiOr11Ilg tSOdl-U V1 H(1�1CQla - - V�: LVUGL 41 , l 'Vol
The Secretary noted for the record that the following letter was
received from Mr . Frank Liguori , Commissioner of Planning , Tompkins County :
® " October 20 , 1981 '
Mr . Lewis D . Cartee . . .
RE : Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239- 1 and -m of the New York
State General Municipal Law ,
CASE : Appeal for dimension variance by Country Club of Ithaca at
1011 Hanshaw Road ( within 500 feet of county highway and
municipal boundary ) .
will
. . . This / 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 recommenda-
tion is indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to
act without prejudice .
( sgd . ) Frank R . Liguori "
MOTION by Mrs . Joan Reuning , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen .
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca ' Zoning Board of Appeals grant and
® hereby does grant a dimerision _ ( area ) variance from the requirements of
Section 65 of the Town . of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , as amended , to the
Country Club of Ithaca , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 71 - 7 - 1 , to permit
the construction of a fence thirty feet ( 30 ' ) high , maximum , and two hun =
dred fifty feet ( 2501 ) long ( maximum ) adjacent to the north property line
of said Country Club at 1011 Hanshaw Road , Ithaca , N . Y . , with the stipulatior
that the matter . be reviewed in two years from the date of this grant of
variance , at . which time if the Country Club of Ithaca has been able to pur-
chase more land to change the driving range , the fence would then be
removed .
There being no further discussion , . the Vice -Chair called for a vote . ,
Aye - Austen , Reuning , Aron .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Vice- Chairman Austen declared the matter of the Appeal of The Country
Club of Ithaca duly closed at 8 : 11 p . m .
APPEAL OF MRS . CURT FOERSTER , APPELLANT , RANE RANDOLPH, AS AGENT , FROM THE
DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT TO RECONSTRUCT
Q AN EXISTING BUILDING CREATING A SIDE YARD DEFICIENT IN SIZE AT 881 TAUGHAN -
NOCK BLVD . , TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 25 - 2 - 20 , ITHACA , N . Y . PERMISSION IS DENIED
UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF
x ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE .
w Vice - Chairman Austen declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 8 : 12 p . m . and invited Mr . . Rane Randolph to speak to
the Board .
n
, 5
•� ;. , i . 4er
THE ZWERMANS
Collectible Gifu, J
Figurines, Philatelic Scamps and Greeting Cods
1462 SLATERVILLE RD., ITHACA, NY 14650
607.2734390 _.
Hours 2 - 6 p.m. or by appointment
We have- for sale upwards of 100 Hummels that range in rice ;
%- f ' om � twe` r r r ,
P } nty-three to
to fourteen hundred dollars . Our stamp collections cover USA and! United Nations ,
Holland , Canada, Germany , England , and a range of other countries , Plate blocks and
whole sheets are in good supply . A wide selection of imported , reasonably priced ,
greeting cards are also in our display room . We also have find bone china cups and
®, saucers from England . They are Royal Albert Royal Chelsea
� Y , and She. Ily( collectible ) ,
. and now ten inch plates Wedgewood Flowers of the month . Also one set of fine bone
china from Syracuse , hand painted , Sweetheart heart pattern ( eight place setting ) .
For Christmas shop in a relaxed comfortable atmosphere , Visit the Zwerman ' s
display room at 1462 Slaterville Road . We have lots of free parking . More gifts and card
comming . Open 12/7/81 ,
1 '• ' ai
1
EXHIBIT E
DECEMBER 5 , 1979
® The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met on Wednesday ,
December 5 , 1979 , in Town - Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) ,
Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . . .
PRESENT : Vice- Chairman Jack D . Hewett , Edward W . King , Joan Reuning ,
Edward "N . Austen , Lewis D . Cartee ( Building Inspector ) .
ALSO PRESENT Mark Keller, Paul J . Zwermari Ellen Schulman , Michael
J . Pichel ,
Vice- Chairman Hewett declared the meeting duly opened . at 7 . 36 p . m .
APPEAL OF JOHN L . MARION , APPELLANT , MARK KELLER , AGENT , FROM THE DEC.I
SION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING PERMISSION TO ESTABLISH A HOME
OCCUPATION INVOLVING THE DISPLAY AND LIMITED SALES OF HU11iMEL FIGURINES
WITHIN A PROPOSED SINGLE - FAMILY HOME ON A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 2 = 22 FRONTING ON SLATERVILLE ROAD , REMAINING PORTION
FRONTING ON PINE TREE ROAD , PERMISSION IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INS -
PECTOR UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 12 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE .
Vice - Chairman Hewett declared . the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 36 p . m . , and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s
Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in
Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on November 26 , 19791, and November 30 ,
® 1979 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by
Mail of said Notice of Public Hearing on the various neighbors of the
parcel in question and Mr . . Marion and Mr . Keller , parties to the action .
Mr . Hewett read the Appeal as noted above out loud .
Mr . Keller appeared before the Board and presented the Appeal Form
completed by Mr . Keller as agent for Mr . Marion , and which the Board mem-
bers had before them , and which read as follows : . . " . . . Having been denied
permission to establish home occupation involving the display of Hummel
figurines at tax map #58 - 2 - 22 . . . in violation of section 12 of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . . . would impose practical difficulties and / or
unnecessary hardship as follows : The proposed purchaser wishes to con -
struct a three - bedroom ranch home with attached two - car garage . Purchaser ' :
wife has a collection of Hummel figurines which she would like to have on
display in the garage area . Limited sales of these figurines , or trading
thereof , may occur , but the main intention is for display . Operating hours
will be very limited , possibly just a few hours during the afternoon . In -
crease in traffic will be minimal . " A map delineating the proposed parcel ,
and proposed home , to be split off from Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 was
attached to the Appeal .
Mr . Keller pointed out that the parcel Mr . Zwerman is proposing to
purchase fronts on Route 79 ( Slaterville Road ) . Mr . Keller presented to
the Board a signed purchase offer for the subject lot . Mr . Keller noted
® that the property had been at one time subdivided and also that the owner
has been trying to sell the property with no success . Mr . Keller stated
that Mr . Zwerman proposes very limited activity up there , proposing a new
m single family dwelling with an attached garage and extra parking area .
x He stated that the display of the Hummel figurine collection would be in
w the garage area and possibly the display area would be open for a limited
time in the afternoon for people to stop in and look . There would be very
limited sales or trading of the fiETurines and very little increase in
traffic . Mr . Keller stated that Mr . Zwerman was present and would be glad
Jo speak to the Board . Mr . Hewett invited Mr . Zwerman to do so .
® Mr . Zwerman informed the Board that off - street parking will be
arranged on the lot , which is approximately one and one - tenth acres in size .
There will be an area for tennis court and parking lot , either one . Mr .
Zwerman pointed out that he and his wife have lived on Slaterville Road
before and are very familiar with the traffic there .
Mr . Austen asked if there would be only one driveway . Mr . Zwerman
stated that he would hope that the parking would be so arranged as to allow
driving in on one side of the house and park behind and circle around the
house and out the same driveway .
Mrs . Reuning asked how much parking would be planned . Mr . Zwerman
stated that the area would be roughly 50 ' x 50 ' .
Mr ' . Cartee noted that using a basis of 18 ' per car , this would pro
vide room for about 6 cars .
Mr . King wished to make the comment that he could not really quite
see that this is the kind of variance that this Board should entertain
because there is nothing special in the nature of this lot nor the neigh -
borhood itself that can , as he saw it , justify permitting , really a kind
of commercial use , which is not clearly intended under the existing zoning
ordinance . He stated that the zoning ordinance does , under Section 12 ,
permit certain home occupations and resident professional , or quasi -
professional , activities , but definitely precludes sale or display for sale
® Mr . King stated that the Zwermans can certainly collect figurines , but when
it comes to making a display for sales that is another matter .
Mr . Keller noted that the proposed parcel is right next door to
Video Sound . Mr . King stated that he realized that .
Mr . Zwerman stated that the primary purpose is not to engage in
commercial activities . He stated . that his wife has had a great deal of
health problems including cataracts on both eyes , a detached retina , and
reconstruction of the left eye after being declared legally blind . Mr .
Zwerman stated that there will be no signs and really no commercial
activity . The figurines will be displayed in a two - car garage , and , he
noted , the business and commercial activities can be really discounted .
Mr . King pointed out that a hairdresser might then put wigs in a
window ; a dressmaker could put a dress in the window . Mr . King stated
that it was his opinion that there is not a situation justifying a variance
Mr . Austen asked just how Mrs . Zwerman was proposing to display her
figurine collection .
Mr . Zwerman stated that his wife has about 200 of these figurines
carefully packed in their apartment in University Park , and it is diffi -
cult for her when they are in packages . He noted that a lot of her friends
are collectors also and they visit and trade figurines . He stated that
she is a different person when she is doing this .
x Mr . Austen asked if the display was to be in the windows . Dir . Zwermr.
w stated that they are not concerned with display as such , but with space
in which Mrs . Zwerman can show her collection and enjoy it . IIe added that
she really enjoys this activity .
Mr . Austen wondered if this could be termed a private collection of
things .
® Mr . Keller noted again that this proposal involves no signs , no
advertising - - any sale being among private friends . .
Mrs . Reuning asked if Mrs . Zwerman had a sales tax I . D . number . Mr . .
Zwerman said that she did not have that kind of operation . Mr . Zwerman
noted that his wife has training as an accountant and has done income taxes
for people back when they lived on Slaterville Road .
Mr . King stated that certainly Mrs . Zwerman , if she is doing this
within the confines of the home or garage without a public offering for
sale , he saw no problem , that being a home hobby . Mr . King added that he
might -see even a sign saying " collector " .
Mr . King then asked lair . Zwerman just what he meant by " display " . Mr .
Zwerman described that the figurines would be set up on shelves in an
orderly fashion so that people can see them ; they cannot be seen from the
street .
Mr . Michael Pichel , speaking from the floor , stated that he thought
that the application was absolutely within the spirit of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance , and among other compelling reasons , this is proposed on
a main highway with a business next door , and his house was a paint and
wallpaper store . Mr . Pichel stated that it would be a heartless thing to
deny this request and added that he thought if all the people in Tompkins
® County , came in to look at Hummel figurines all at once , there would probably
® be about twenty and at that would be very gentle persons who would not
detract from the area .
Mr . Hewett stated that he4thought all present thought that " display "
meant " public " display ; firs . Zwerman ' s display is in cabinets within a
garage .
Mr . King stated that , it appearing from the presentation here made ,
what the applicant proposes .to engage in appears to be a customary
home occupation within the meaning of Section 12 of the Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinate , and that there is no need for any variance in this case ;
what said applicant proposes , as long as it does not involve the public
display or advertising of goods or products for sale , would not contravene
the Zoning Ordinance .
MOTION by Mr . Edward IV . King , seconded by Mr . Jack D . Hewett :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca
deny and hereby does deny the application for a variance as requested by
John L . Marion , Appellant , Mark Keller , as Agent , in re a portion of
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 , with the explanation that the
contemplated use appears to be authorized as a customary home occupation
under Section 12 of the Town of ' Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , as long as there
is no public display or advertising for sale of goods or products .
There being no further discussion , the Vice - Chairman called for a
votes
x
w Aye - Hewett , King , Reuning , Austen .
Nay - None .
The Vice - Chairman declared t11e MOTION to be carried unanimously .
Zoning Board of Appeals - 4 - December 5 , 197
CONSIDERATION OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS VACANCY AS OF DECEMBER 31 , 1979 .
® It was noted by the Board that Mr . Edward N . Austen ' s term as a
member of the Zoning Board of Appeals expires on December 31 , 1979 . Mr .
Austen expressed his willingness to serve on the Zoning Board and his
enjoyment of his past years of service .
MOTION by Mr . Jack D . Hewett , seconded by Mr . Edward W . King :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of -Appeals of the Town of Ithaca
recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board that Mr . Edward N .
Austen be re- appointed as . a member of said Zoning Board of Appeals , the
term of such office commencing January 1 , 1980 and terminating December
31 , 1984 .
There being no further discussion , the Vice - Chairman called for a
vote .
Aye - Hewett , King , Reuning .
Nay - None .
Abstain - Austen .
The MOTION was declared to be duly carried and will be transmitted
to the Town Board .
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN BOARD IN RE CHAIRMAN AND VICE -
CHAIRMAN OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS .
MOTION by Mr . Edward N . Austen- , seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning :
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca
recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board that Mr . Peter K .
Francese be reappointed by said Town Board as Chairman of said Zoning Board
of Appeals for the year 1980 ; and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that Mr . . Jack D . Hewett be reappointed by said Town
Board as Vice - Chairman of said Zoning Board of Appeals for the year 1980 .
There being no further discussion , the Vice - Chairman called for a
vote .
Aye - King , Reuning , Austen .
Nay - None .
Abstain - Hewett .
The MOTION was declared to be duly carried and will be transmitted
to the Town Board ,
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Vice - Chairman Hewett declared the December 5 , 1979 )
® meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly closed at 8 : 15
p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
EXHIBIT F Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary .