Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1993-12-15 FINAL FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date C • TOWN OF ITHACA 0 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Clerk DECEMBER 15 , 1993 The following matter was heard on December 15 , 1993 by the Board : APPEAL ( Adjourned for a decision from December 8 , 1993 ) of Mr . John Lamb , Appellant , Richard Jump , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single - family residence with a building height of 51 + / - feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) at 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2 - 41 , Residence District R- 15 . GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS . FILED 1 TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA Date ON 0N ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS o • DECEMBER 15 , 1993 ClerkMA PRESENT : Edward Austen , Harry Ellsworth , Edward King , Pete Scala , Town Attorney John C . Barney , Zoning Enforcement Officer/ Building Inspector Andrew Frost . ABSENT : Robert J . Hines . OTHERS : Dr . John Lamb , Edward C . Hooks , Esq . , Jeannine Lamb , John Lamb , Dave Geiger , Richard Jump , Peter Novelli , PE . The adjourned meeting of December 8 , 1993 was called to order at 7 : 22 P . M . to continue with the following Appeal : APPEAL of Mr . John Lamb , Appellant , Richard Jump , Agent , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single- family residence with a building height of 51+/ - feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) at 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25-2-41 , Residence District R- 15 . Chairman Austen commented that there was quite a bit of work done on the model , and , although he did not count the number of names on the list , it was impressive . Mr . Novelli said there were 68 names . He said he did what he did so that he might • get all the questions answered in one place , for example , the concerns of the landscape plan , the neighbors views , the pictures and so forth . He hopes that it will save time , and Chairman Austen said that he also hopes that it will save time . Chairman Austen said he . went to the east shore to look at the site from there , and as the house stands right now , it is quite obvious . Mr . Scala said that you needed a pair of binoculars and that today was not a good day to look because it was quite hazy . Chairman Austen said he did have a pair of binoculars because he wanted to get a better look and see what it looked like with the rest of the surroundings- - the structure to the south of it and a couple of structures that set back in to the north . Chairman Austen said the planting certainly would be a big asset in hiding it , especially from the lake view . Chairman Austen said , however , it just was not good weather to take a boat out on the lake . Mr . Hooks said that the pictures that Mr . Ellsworth is looking at , are houses on the other side of the lake . He continued that the reason that some of the pictures are there is they show how the foliage and existing vegetation can , in fact , hide the view and that these pictures are here to address some of the concerns that have been expressed by the Board . Mr . Scala wanted to ask a couple of questions for clarification . Mr . Scala said that he presumes the two issues involved are ( 1 ) the height variance and ( 2 ) minimizing adverse impact and existing residential neighborhoods . Mr . Scala said he questions why the Board is looking at the height variance . Mr . Scala said that if one was to take the rules on height here , it assumes level ground , not a slope . Mr . Scala said that if he averaged out the slope it would be by no means that excessive . He continued that if one takes the measurement that is there now , it would measure 50 feet which is nonsense because one would have to take either a mean or an average elevation on the house . Mr . Scala said that it does not make sense to interpret the rule of height as the lowest point on the lake to the highest point on the house . Mr . Scala said that , in other words , height is being interpreted here , and he said he disagrees . Mr . Scala said the average height of the house is far from 50 feet when one averages out the slope . -Town of Ithaca 2 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 Mr . Novelli used the model to demonstrate the way by which the height is averaged , and Mr . Scala agreed with the points and wanted to know how the average was relative to the maximum allowed in the "own . Mr . Scala said that it cer,a_n-y was not the 50 feet , wanting to know the right figure . Mr . Novelli said it - s so�ewhere between 30 and 32 feet- - an average Grade to +- e height of the roof . Mr . Scala said that he thinks the Board has run into this before , and , in this area , one is dealing with such incredible slopes . Mr . Scala said that someone had said it is a 50 percent slope and that is roughly 25 degrees , and he continued that the slope looked even greater than that . Mr . Scala said he was only looking at where it was cut out to get the materials down the hill . Mr . Scala said it is very impressive , and it is a slope so steep that one cannot use the regulation relevant to the way the ordinance reads . Mr . King said that he did not see how the Board can change the ordinance . Mr . Scala said he is not changing the ordinance . Mr . King read , " Page 2 . Paragraph 4 . c . Definition . Height from the lowest exterior grade as it relates to a building means the vertical distance from the lowest point of the exterior finished grade from the lowest point which is down the hill at the face of the building to the highest point of the roof excluding chimneys . " Mr . Scala said that you are allowing for two floors , and he asked if it made sense . Mr . Scala said judgment had to be used somewhere . Mr . Scala said the Board can read the letter of the law , but horse - sense has to come in somewhere . Mr . King said that that is what the Board is doing , and Mr . Scala said that he did not agree . Mr . Frost said that he thinks the argument suggests that the slope is what is contributing to the height problem and if Dr . Lamb builds up the grade on the downhill side you have not necessarily picked up the mass of the building and the visual impact . Mr . Frost said , but , the way the Town measures height , it is clearly the problem with the severe slope . Mr . Jump stated that , in a sense , part of the discussion and part of , perhaps the principal point here , is that it does indicate that this is a rather unique circum- stance that the Board is faced with , given this slope . Mr . King said that the situation is the same for , probably , a mile up and down the lake . He said it certainly is not that unique . Mr . King said that height variances have certainly been granted because of a slope and a building on a hill , but in a 6 - 7 foot variance , the Board yielded to giving the variance only after some considerable discussion . Mr . Scala said this has not been done along the lake . Mr . Frost said this height variance at 51 foot is clearly the largest height variance asked for a residential building . Mr . Scala said that is only because it is not steeper , and he said that if it was steeper , it would be more than 51 feet . Mr . Frost said that generally the slope has been the problem with all the height variances . Attorney Barney said that as part of the architect of the language in the zoning ordinance , the Town attempted to , in exchange for using something like an average grade which is very difficult to define and difficult to detect or formulate , go for a slightly larger height . He said he thinks the Town used 34 feet for the interior height in exchange for being able to measure for precise points- - barely discernable points . He said that as he remembers the discussion with the Codes and Ordinances Committee , there would be situations in the Town of Ithaca where this height will not work in a typical situation . It may not work where there is a substantial , or even an insubstantial slope , and that that is what Boards of Zoning Appeals are there for- - to deal with those kinds of situations where , under law , deviation would be acceptable or permissible without really doing great violence to the intent of the Ordinance . Attorney Barney said there is a precision of measurement with the *Town of Ithaca 3 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 opportunity to come to the Board of Zoning Appeals , and that is what brings Dr . Lamb here tonight . Attorney Barney said he agrees with Mr . King that the Board cannot rewrite the Ordinance , as much as the Board would like to rewrite it and talk about an average , but that is not the language of the Ordinance . He said that that language was expressly considered and rejected . Attorney Barney said that , on the other hand , he did not think there was a sense by that group , and ultimately the Town Board , when they adopted this legislation , that a variance of 51 feet would not necessarily be appropriate given a certain circumstance . He said that it was up to this Board to use the criteria that is the Town law to make the determination . Mr . Ellsworth asked about the November Appeal that had such a steep slope . Mr . Frost said he believed it was around 41 feet , and Chairman Austen said it was a very minor part of the building . Mr . Ellsworth said that it was still very similar circumstances . Attorney Barney said this Board also granted a height variance for 70 or 72 feet for an Ithaca College structure , and , although it is not residential , Attorney Barney said it still has the same height limitation . According to Attorney Barney , the Board took into consideration where it was located and decided that the 72 feet was not inappropriate in that circumstance . Mr . Hooks asked for a point of clarification regarding Mr . Frost ' s reference to 51 feet . Mr . Hooks said they have been working with what they believed to be about 45 feet . Mr . Frost said that was the point he called Mr . Novelli on . Mr . Frost said that the way he scaled it , it came out to be more closely to 41 or 43 feet . He said when you take the grade at the downhill side of the column , when the upper level of the building is cantilevered over the foundation , measuring that as the lowest grade , • then you get the 51 feet . Mr . Frost went to the model to show Mr . Hooks what point he was talking about . Mr . Frost said if the measurement is from the floor , - it is either 41 or 43 feet , and he said if you measure from the column , you gain the extra height to 51 feet . Mr . Hooks said the posts shown gives the 51 feet , and Mr . Frost said that adds to that total height . Mr . Frost said the Board had discussed that building some kind of a retaining wall around those columns would effectively raise the height measurement and would not necessarily change the building . Chairman Austen said that he did not see how that would change the impact of the building and that the plantings would do more to change the impact than raising the ground level . Mr . Ellsworth wanted to know what are existing plantings and what would be new plantings and if the size shown on the model is the size that will be planted or is that the size they would grow to be . Mr . Geiger said that only the patch in the middle would be what is missing . He continued that all the rest exists and the plantings are to scale with the house . Mr . Geiger said he tried to err on the smaller side and not to exaggerate the whole thing . Mr . Frost said the cleared patch , in truth , almost goes from one corner of the building to the other . Mr . Geiger disagreed and used the model to illustrate his point . Mr . Jump said the front of the building is 48 feet long and the opening is approximately 10 feet . A general discussion followed about having pictures of the area in question . Mr . King addressed Mr . Ellsworth ' s question about the November appeal which dealt with a widow ' s walk which was on a house in the middle of 40- some acres , up in the back woods , which was not highly visible from anywhere . Mr . Scala said the Lamb house is not visible from anywhere either . He said one has to be swimming out in the ® middle of the lake to see it . Mr . Scala said that from where you see the house , one would never know the height of the house - - certainly from the road , you would not know it from the lots on either side , and to see the house , he agreed that Mr . King is correct , one would have to be out on a boat . Mr . King said that was so , including living across the lake from it . Mr . Scala said you cannot see anything .Town of Ithaca 4 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 from across the lake except with a high- powered scope . Mr . King agreed and added that was correct , at this time . Mr . Hooks said that Dr . Lamb went to the people who live across the lace on East Shore Drive and he said the people ' s initial reaction was , " Why are you even here ; we can ' t even see what it is . " Mr . Hooks said Dr . Lamb had the model , showing exactly what is going to be built , and these peoplesletter are among those in Exhibit C , showing no opposition . Mr . Scala said he was above this place on Sunday , a beautiful clear day , and nothing could be seen , by eye , down in that direction . Mr . Scala said that it could be picked out with a scope , but it could be barely found because of the raw cut . Mr . Scala said the house cannot be seen unless one was dead- smack in front of it and out on the water , where the population is rather low . Chairman Austen said that , at this point , only the foundation is being looked at , and there are two levels to go above it . Chairman Austen said the area can be spotted fairly well by looking at the home to the south of it which is quite massive . Mr . King wanted to know which exhibit shows the planting plans for vegetation , and Mr . Hooks said that was Exhibit E . He said there is a map of the current vegetation and one of what is going to be added . Mr . Hooks said there should also be a description of what those various plants are and give the Board some indication of what the height will be upon maturity . Mr . King asked if there was any question as to Exhibit E . and Mr . Hooks wanted to know what Mr . King wanted to know . Mr . Hooks said that if the question was if it was going to be done , Mr . Hooks said it is his understanding that Exhibit E is exactly what the plans are and that there is no intent to deviate from that . Dr . Lamb said Mr . Hooks ' s statement was correct . He continued that that was what Mr . Geiger was hired for, and he said that , from the beginning of the project , it was specified that the builder had to be very careful not to disturb the existing trees . Mr . King said that the vegetation schedule was not previously presented to the Board and that this is the first time the Board has seen it . Mr . King said he thought about the high columns rising up and the effect they might have from the lake since the house would be up on a bluff above the shoreline . Mr . King said he believed that the only way to mitigate that is by vegetation , not only on the east side ( the front of the house ) but also along the north and south sides . Dr . Lamb said that the trees were the beauty of the lot , and he said that was why , from the beginning , he decided to take down only what was absolutely necessary to put the house in place . Dr . Lamb said that the downed trees were taken down for that purpose and no other ones were planned to be taken down . Dr . Lamb said that he wants to protect the remaining trees because he does not want to have to be looking at the neighbors and that is why they are all kept in place . Dr . Lamb said there is that little 10 foot opening so , from that great room he can look out at the lake so there would be a view . Dr . Lamb said all the other trees are for his benefit as well as for the benefit of others . Mr . Hooks said the Board can get an idea as to how dense it remains by looking at the pictures attached to Exhibit D , numbered 3 and 4 . Mr . Hooks said the pictures give some perspective , albeit the pictures are copies . Mr . King asked what would be the house ' s exterior finish , and Dr . Lamb said it will be a gray- stained cedar siding with white trim . Mr . Scala asked if Dr . Lamb was familiar with the cantilevered , octagon house just above the Yacht Club , and Dr . Lamb indicated that he was . Mr . Scala said that house is 110 feet if the columns are included . Mr . King asked if that was from the ground up , and Mr , Scala indicated that it was . Mr . Hooks then said that it was not in the Town of Ithaca , and. Mr . Scala said that it was in the community . Mr . Scala said this was a precedent . He continued that if anything is built with an overhang Town of Ithaca 5 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 ( Carl Sagan ' s cantilevered house on Cayuga Heights Road , for example ) it certainly is not objectionable , although , admittedly that if one was down on the canal somewhere , one could look up high enough , although , Mr . Scala continued , he doubts it . Mr . Scala said this is the method of construction that is upcoming where there are very steep slopes . He said if columns are counted in the height , then there are some enormous numbers that are never going to be met by any kind of ordinance or code . Mr . King clarified Mr . Scala ' s remarks in that he was speaking of support columns . Mr . Scala said that was correct , and Mr . King said that he did not believe these were support columns . Dr . Lamb said the columns are support columns . Chairman Austen said the columns are to hold a cantilevered part . Mr . Jump said the area in question is boxed- in columns - - - timber , clad in cedar . Mr . Jump said they support the great room . Mr . Ellsworth went back to discuss the planting plans , asking if the heights on the plans are the planted heights , and Mr . Geiger said the heights shown are the heights the trees and shrubs will grow to . He continued that some of the trees are already 8 - 10 feet tall . Mr . King asked if Dr . Lamb was familiar with the presenta- tion that Dr . Lamb ' s attorney prepared and Mr . King wanted to know if Dr . Lamb had any quarrel with it or if he accepted all the statements in it . Mr . King said that it is going to be part of the record , and he wanted to be sure that Dr . Lamb was aware of it . Dr . Lamb said that he agreed with the presentation . Mr . King wanted to discuss the side yard setback , and he reviewed the plot plan . He said it looked like the side yard setback is approximately 25 - 28 feet from the south side lot line , with the requirement being 15 feet . He continued that location is on the generous side for the south side side yard setback regulations . Mr . King said that , on the north side , it is 29 - 30 feet , making both side yards generous . Mr . King said this fact was alluded to in the previous meeting , and he believes it was also pointed out that there are drainage gorges , both north and south of this lot . A picture was provided by Dr . Lamb showing the drainage gorge on the south side . Chairman Austen said there was also a ravine on the north side of the lot . Dr . Lamb said the ravine was pretty much identical to the picture of the one to the south , but Chairman Austen said that he believes the one on the north is a bit larger . Mr . King said all of these factors seem to mitigate the impact regarding the immediate neighbors . Dr . Lamb said that he wanted to bring to the Board ' s attention that the houses on both sides are set in front of the house he is building inasmuch as when they look out to the lake or to the side towards Ithaca , they will see water . Mr . King asked if those houses were located further down the embankment , towards the lake , and Dr . Lamb said they were . Mr . Scala asked if the closest building , looking south , is a boat house , and Dr . Lamb said that was a house . Mr . Ellsworth wanted to know if someone was living in it , and Dr . Lamb said the owner lives in the one on the water and rents the two above him . Mr . Ellsworth said the top structure must be behind Dr . Lamb , and Dr . Lamb said that was true . He said the top structure is right on the road . Mr . Ellsworth said that , they would- - looking out to the side - -be able to see Dr . Lamb ' s house , and Dr . Lamb said that would be true . Chairman Austen said the Board has a Motion tabled on the environmental impact . Mr . King asked if the motion was for a positive declaration . Chairman Austen said that was correct , and he asked if there was any more discussion on the matter . Attorney Barney said that , procedurally , the Board has to bring the Motion off the table and then proceed . Environmental Assessment MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 • RESOLVED , that the Motion regarding the Environmental Assessment Form be removed from the table from the meeting of December 8 , 1993 . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Austen . NAYS - None . The Motion carried unanimously to remove the Motion from the table . Mr . King discussed if the motion is for the Board to make a positive declaration , and Mr . Ellsworth said that was correct . Mr . King said he believes the Board has enough evidence , indication , and intent to plant the area sufficiently , referring to the items in Exhibit E , indicating that the impact of the excessive height of the building could be substantially mitigated , if not totally eliminated , to condition any variance on sufficient plantings to mitigate it so that he believes the positive declaration is inappropriate in this particular case . Therefore , Mr . King said that he does not believe Mr . Ellsworth ' s motion should be successful . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the December 8 , 1993 Motion regarding a positive declaration for the Environmental Assessment Form be withdrawn . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Austen . NAYS - None . The Motion to withdraw the Motion for a positive declaration on the Environmental Assessment Form carried unanimously . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative declaration of Environmental Impact for Dr . Lamb ' s Appeal for the property at 901 Taughannock Boulevard based on the report , exhibits and the planting plan as shown on the model , with the following findings : 1 ) That the plans , if carried out , would eliminate any significant environmental impact . 2 ) That the plantings are going to hold the soil . 3 ) That the plantings are going to mitigate the height by 10 feet when they are planted . ® 4 ) That the planting plan list , as particularly listed in Exhibit E , is carried out . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : .Town of Ithaca 7 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 • AYES - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Austen . NAYS - None . The Motion carried unanimously for a negative determination of environmental impact . MOTION By Mr . Edward King , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the Board grant the Appeal of John Lamb , Appellant , which is a height variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the construction of a single - family residence with a building height of 51 + / - feet ( 30 feet maximum height allowed ) at 901 Taughannock Blvd . , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25 - 2 - 41 , Residence District R- 15 , with the following findings : 1 ) That this variance is permitted as presented in the Appellant ' s plans and in the scale model . 2 ) That the height variance along the easterly , exterior portion of the property might be as much as 51 feet , but is generally in the neighborhood of 42 - 45 feet . 3 ) That the 51 feet height variance is measured from the base of the column to the peak of the roof and is not being measured from any other point , making the 51 feet the maximum height allowed . 4 ) That the considerable benefit to the Appellant in granting the variance is consideration of the fact of the extensive plans that have been undertaken . 5 ) That the detriment to neighboring properties can be mitigated and is seemed to be not too significant , as evidenced by the numerous letters presented in the presentation on the Appellant ' s behalf . 6 ) That the best method to achieve mitigation would be achieved by plantings and trees about the house . 7 ) That , due to the extreme slope ( 500 ) of the lot , it would seem that although the height variance is probably the greatest ever granted by this Board for a residential construction , it appears to be the minimum variance that would be necessary and adequate to enable the Appellant to construct a house and still preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood . 8 ) That the construction process and the subsequent plantings have emphasized a minimum adverse impact on the terrain on the area . Conditions of the granting of the height variance are as follows : 1 ) That the planting proposal and schedules which the Appellant presented as Exhibit E in the presentation will be carried out . Is 2 ) That if the review of the plan by the Town of Ithaca Planning Department and , in consultation with the Appellant , a revision is thought to be reasonably required in any particulars , there should be some control and cooperation with the Town Planning Department to figure out whether the proposed plantings will , indeed , mitigate the height impact of the house . -Toim of Ithaca 8 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 • 3 ) That the Town of Ithaca Planning Staff has approved the planting schedule and that the planting will be carried out as expeditiously as possible with the Appellant making such a commitment to the Planning Department . Any changes to the schedule desired by the Appellant should be in written form to the Planning Department . 4 ) That a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued until the Town staff has indicated reasonable satisfaction that the planting schedule is being carried out . 5 ) That before a permanent Certificate of Occupancy is issued the plants will be in . 6 ) That the Certificate of Occupancy can be revoked if the plantings are not completed by December 31 , 1994 . Discussion followed about the date and completion schedule of the plantings . Attorney Barney said there is authority in the Town ' s Ordinance that a temporary Certificate of Occupancy is allowed for up to six months after the house is completed ( which allows one to get into the house ) and that six months should carry well beyond the Fall of 1994 . Dr . Lamb asked if that might be a problem at the bank getting a mortgage , and Attorney Barney said that he believes that a temporary Certificate of Occupancy could be obtained with the only condition being the installation of plantings . Dr . Lamb asked if it would be better to put a date in , and Attorney Barney said that point is not being argued but that , mechanically , once the permanent Certificate of Occupancy is issued , the Town ' s involvement is much reduced . Mr . ® Scala said that successful plantings should be done before the end of the Fall of 1994 , and Attorney Barney said that if a temporary Certificate of Occupancy is used , you are adding 8 months plus 6 months , and the Board is really into March of 1995 . Attorney Barney said that Dr . Lamb should adequately be covered with that . Dr . Lamb asked if a bank mortgage could be obtained with a temporary Certificate of Occupancy , and Attorney Barney said that he assumes the bank will approve a construction mortgage and that the only holdup might be the final draw . When asked what bank was involved , Dr . Lamb said it was Cayuga Mortgage Company . Attorney Barney said that he did not believe there should be any problems with them . Attorney Barney said that if that becomes a problem , Dr . Lamb could come back to this Board and then get that condition waived . Mr . King said that he included in the motion that with the planting commitment made to the Planning Department , changes that might be desired should be put in writing , and that the Planning Department would know that the planting has to be in by a certain time . Attorney Barney said that he was looking at it from the point that if the commitment was not honored , the choices of the Town are basically if the Certificate has been issued , the Town has to bring an action for specific performance in trying to kick somebody out . Mr . Hooks wanted to know if the Board is asking that the landscape plans be approved by the Planning Department , and he continued that the planting plan is submitted to the Board as part of Exhibit E . Attorney Barney said the problem with that is the Town ' s Planning Department has not yet seen the plan , and Attorney Barney said the Town ' s Planning Department can see the plan tomorrow or next week . Attorney Barney said that kind of approval can be done very quickly , and he said that if there is any problem with the approval , Dr . Lamb will know it very quickly . Attorney Barney said he is hearing that the plants cannot be planted , with good results , until October , 1994 and that is what the time is needed for the accomplishment of the planting . Attorney Barney said that he believes that the approval of the plan itself can be accomplished quickly . Mr . Hooks reviewed that ( 1 ) the Planning Department will look at the planting / landscape scheme and ( 2 ) make sure , 'Town of Ithaca 9 Zoning Board of Appeals December 15 , 1993 once the plans are approved , that the plants are planted by December 31 , 1994 . Mr . King said this was correct , with the understanding that the Planning Department can require changes if it thinks something is not appropriate . Mr . Hooks asked for clarification if , for example , the Planning Department required replacing a planting with a redwood planting , it would be a bit problematic . Attorney Barney said that , if that were the case , Dr . Lamb would always have recourse to come back to this Board if he thought the Planning Department was being contrary . Attorney Barney suggested that Dr . Lamb conduct his conversations directly with the Town Engineer who is supervising the Planning Department until a new Planner is hired . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Scala , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The Motion carried unanimously . With no further business , the meeting was adjourned at 8 : 10 P . M . Roberta H . Komaromi Recording Secretary �ffdward Austen , Chairman