Loading...
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 .