HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2020-12-15Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
1
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Minutes — December 15, 2020
Present:
Ed Finegan, Chair
David Kramer, Vice Chair
Stephen Gibian, Member
Katelin Olson, Member
Avi Smith, Member
Susan Stein, Member
Donna Fleming, Common Council
Liaison
Bryan McCracken, Historic
Preservation Planner
Anya Harris, City of Ithaca staff
Absent:
None
Pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order 202.1, this meeting was conducted remotely via the
online meeting platform Zoom. Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m.
A. Smith joined at 5:37 due to technical difficulties in signing into the meeting.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 114 Kelvin Place, Cornell Heights Historic District – Proposal to Remove a Utility
Chimney on the North Side of the West Roof Slope.
S. Gibian recused himself due to being directly involved with the project as an architect.
Applicant Colin Smith appeared in front of the Commission to present his proposal. He said they
are remodeling the kitchen and bath and would like to remove the chimney so they can improve
the layout. The chimney is no longer in use. They think it may have been in place to exhaust a
water heater or a stove in the kitchen. It has been unused for a long time. It’s in a deteriorated
condition as well. Additionally, he said it’s not highly visible, except for a few locations, at the
end of his neighbor’s driveway and a vantage point across the street when the leaves are off the
trees. He said it’s in the rear of the house and the roofline and dormers make it just barely
visible.
Chair E. Finegan asked if any of the Commission members had questions. He confirmed it’s not
particularly visible due to its location.
K. Olson asked if it’s from the same era as the primary chimney. She said she’s asking because if
the bricks are the same, she would request they retain the bricks for use in any future repair
work, as they would match.
C. Smith said that there are bricks above the roofline, but below that, they are brick dimensions,
but appear to be a different material, speed blocks, (molded clay with with holes through them).
He agreed to retain the bricks.
Several Commission members said they had no problems with the chimney’s removal.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
2
Public Hearing
On a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, and no written comments
submitted to be read aloud, Chair E. Finegan closed the Public Hearing on a motion by S. Stein,
seconded by D. Kramer.
Chair E. Finegan asked if there were any questions.
K. Olson asked if they would be patching the roof with the same roofing material as what’s
already on it.
C. Smith said yes.
The Commission members agreed to add the condition that bricks be salvaged if possible.
RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Stein, seconded by A. Smith.
WHEREAS, 114 Kelvin Pl is located within the Cornell Heights Historic District, as designated
under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 1989, and as listed on
the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places in 1989, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness, dated November 22, 2020, was submitted for review to the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Colin Smith on behalf of
property owner Sushil Verma, including the following: (1) two narratives respectively
titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); (2) a marked-
up tax map showing the location the impacted element and proposed change; and (3)
three photographs documenting existing conditions, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for
118 Heights Court, and the City of Ithaca’s Cornell Heights Historic District
Summary Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves the
removal of a utility chimney on the north side of the west roof slope, and
WHEREAS, the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness is a Type II Action under the New
York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate
impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
3
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing for the purpose of considering approval of the Application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC
meeting on December 15, 2020, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and
the proposal:
As identified in the City of Ithaca’s Cornell Heights Historic District Summary
Statement, the period of significance for the area now known as the Cornell Heights
Historic District is 1898-1937.
As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, the stucco-
clad Prairie-Style residence at 114 Kelvin Pl was constructed between 1916 and 1917.
Constructed within the period of significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District
and possessing a high level of architectural integrity, the property is a contributing
element of the Cornell Heights Historic District.
The project under consideration involves the removal of a utility chimney that is
likely original to the property. Located on the west roof slope (rear elevation) behind
a hipped-roof dormer on the east roof slope and not rising very high above the roof
plane, the chimney is not significantly visible from the public way.
In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new
construction, or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC must determine that
the proposed exterior work will not have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance and value of either the
landmark or, if the improvement is within a district, of the neighboring
improvements in such district. In considering architectural and cultural
value, the Commission shall consider whether the proposed change is
consistent with the historic value and the spirit of the architectural style of the
landmark or district in accordance with Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code.
In making this determination, the Commission is guided by the principles set
forth in Section 228-6B of the Municipal Code, as further elaborated in
Section 228-6C, and by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation, and in this case specifically the following principles and
Standards:
Principle #2 The historic features of a property located within, and contributing
to the significance of, an historic district shall be altered as little as possible and
any alterations made shall be compatible with both the historic character of the
individual property and the character of the district as a whole.
Standard #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved.
The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and spaces that
characterize a property will be avoided.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
4
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity
of the property and its environment.
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2, and Standard #9, the removal of the
chimney will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter features and spaces
that characterize the property.
RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the Cornell
Heights Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be it further,
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal
meets criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness with the
following condition(s):
• The chimney shall be carefully disassembled, and all salvageable bricks shall be
labelled and stored on site in dry, secure location for future potential use as
repair materials for the principal decorative chimney.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: S. Stein
Seconded by: K. Olson
In Favor: S. Stein, K. Olson, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, A. Smith
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: 0
Recused: S. Gibian
Vacancies: 1
Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner’s representative to bring to the attention
of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans, including but not limited to changes
required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as
construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop
work order or revocation of the building permit.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
5
B. 314 West State Street, Downtown West Historic District – Proposal to Install a Black
Metal Fence Across the Driveway in the East Side Yard and Install Two Temporary
Portable Restrooms in the Front Yard.
Applicants Michelle McElroy and John Barry of the Southern Tier AIDS Program (STAP)
appeared in front of the Commission to present a proposal to install a 6-foot tall aluminum fence
and gate across the driveway to restrict access in the overnight hours when staff is not there to
monitor the property. This is in response to problems with people (often under the influence)
coming on site overnight and disturbing the neighbors and doing damage to their property.
Chair E. Finegan asked if there were any other points where one could gain access to the rear
yard.
J. Barry said that there is one other gap at the rear of the property that’s about 18 inches across,
and he said that they would have the fencing contractor look at it while he is on site.
S. Gibian said that the description says flat top, but the drawing shows an arch.
J. Barry said that the receptionist who did the sketch took liberty with it.
M. McElroy said that both options exist, so it could be either.
D. Fleming asked if the intent of the fence is to prevent people from gathering where they are
gathering now.
J. Barry said yes, that’s what the neighbors have requested. He said this is not a new problem,
and they have tried other ways of addressing it. They have cameras. They have given police
permission to come onto the property as needed. He said that while they have security during
business hours, they don’t have resources for 24-hour security staff.
D. Fleming asked if they will just congregate elsewhere.
J. Barry said he doesn’t know, but they are pursuing this as a possible solution in the interest of
being a good neighbor.
D. Fleming asked if he wanted to discuss alternative solutions to this issue.
J. Barry said he’s not sure, but perhaps better services for homeless individuals.
D. Fleming said it seems like they are suggesting addressing it as more of a City-wide issue.
M. McElroy said that the other piece of their proposal (portable toilets) is also intended to
address something that’s more a City-wide issue as well.
S. Gibian asked if there’s something beyond the needle exchange that brings people to that
location.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
6
M. McElroy said yes, people congregate in specific neighborhoods for specific reasons. She said
the corner of State and Plain has a large amount of affordable housing that’s not well maintained.
It’s close to a place where a lot of people are placed for DSS. It’s next door to DSS itself, and it’s
a few doors down from Cayuga Addiction Recovery Services. She said there are a number of
service providers on the block serving people who are homeless or using substances. She said
that a lot of these individuals are unstably housed within a few blocks of the site, and offering
this site as a congregation area is in response to community requests that they not be on the
Commons.
J. Barry added that it was to avoid negative impacts on the business community.
K. Olson asked if this is a place where people are welcome to gather during the day.
J. Barry said yes.
K. Olson asked if the space will remain open to use during the day.
M. McElroy said yes. The gate will allow people in during the day and be locked after hours.
K. Olson said she has concerns about the portable toilets being out front, but she would be okay
with them in the rear.
M. McElroy said the portable toilets is not a standalone STAP project. It’s being funded by
several local non-profits. The reason they are part of this proposal is that the County and the City
are unwilling to put them on public property, so a local non-profit has to host them. The concern
for the funding is that they have to be publicly accessible, which they wouldn’t be if they are
secured in the back.
Chair. E. Finegan suggested they review the two proposals. He asked if anyone had any
objections to the fence.
S. Stein said no.
S. Gibian asked if it would be in front of or behind the chimney at 310 W. State.
J. Barry said in front.
S Gibian asked if it would be in front of or behind the window.
J. Barry said behind.
M. McElroy said Teresa Halpert, owner of 310 W. State, has approved the placement of the post
on her property.
K. Olson asked about the fence product.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
7
J. Barry said the fencing company is Belland and the manufacturer they work with is called
Active Yards.
B. McCracken said they could include final staff approval as a condition in the resolution.
Chair E. Finegan asked if they should consider the two items (fence and portable toilets)
separately.
B. McCracken said that’s the way he hoped it would be handled, and that’s why he wrote two
resolutions.
Chair E. Finegan asked if they wanted to open to the public regarding the fencing.
Public Hearing
On a motion by S. Stein, seconded by K. Olson, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
Four written comments received in response to this proposal are included as an addendum to
these minutes.
There being no members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed
the Public Hearing on a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Gibian.
Chair E. Finegan asked if any Commission members had any additional comments or questions.
S. Gibian asked if the fence would be gloss or matte.
J. Barry said he was partial to matte, but was fine with either.
Commission members agreed matte was fine.
RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson.
WHEREAS, 314 West State Street is located within the Downtown West Historic District, as
designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 2015, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness, dated November 25, 2020, was submitted for review to the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by John Barry on behalf of
property owner Southern Tier AIDS Program (STAP), including the following: (1)
two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for
Changes(s); (2) two sketches representing the proposed alteration; and (3) two
photographs documenting the existing conditions, and
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
8
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the entry in the annotated list of properties included within
the Downtown West Historic District for 314 West State Street, and the City of
Ithaca’s Downtown West Historic District Summary Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves the
installation of sections 6’ high, black metal fencing and two gates across the driveway
in the east side yard of the property, and
WHEREAS, the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness is a Type II Action under the New
York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate
impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and
WHEREAS, a Public Hearing for the purpose of considering approval of the Application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC
meeting on December 15, 2020, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and
the proposal:
As identified in the City of Ithaca’s Downtown West Historic District Summary
Statement, the period of significance for the area now known as the Downtown
West Historic District is 1880 - c.1922.
As indicated in the individual property entry in the annotated list of properties
included within the Downtown West Historic District, the Queen Ann-Style
residence at 314 West State Street was designed by locally significant architect Alvah
B. Wood and constructed between 1885 and 1886.
Constructed within the period of significance of the Downtown West Historic
District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing
element of the Downtown West Historic District.
The proposal under consideration involves the installation of two gates and sections
of fence across the driveway at 314 W. State Street to secure the property and limit
access to its rear parking area after regular business hours.
In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new
construction, or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC must determine that
the proposed exterior work will not have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance and value of either the
landmark or, if the improvement is within a district, of the neighboring
improvements in such district. In considering architectural and cultural
value, the Commission shall consider whether the proposed change is
consistent with the historic value and the spirit of the architectural style of the
landmark or district in accordance with Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
9
In making this determination, the Commission is guided by the principles set
forth in Section 228-6B of the Municipal Code, as further elaborated in
Section 228-6C, and by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for
Rehabilitation, and in this case specifically the following principles and
Standards:
Principle #2 The historic features of a property located within, and
contributing to the significance of, an historic district shall be altered as little
as possible and any alterations made shall be compatible with both the
historic character of the individual property and the character of the district as
a whole.
Principle #3 New construction located within an historic district shall be
compatible with the historic character of the district within which it is
located.
Standard #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and
preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and
spaces that characterize a property will be avoided.
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity
of the property and its environment.
Standard #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall
be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential
form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be
unimpaired.
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2, and Standard #9, the installation of two
gates and sections of black metal fencing will not remove distinctive materials and
will not alter features and spaces that characterize the property.
Also with respect to Principle #2, Principle #3, and Standard #9, the proposed the
gates and sections of fence are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and
architectural features of the property and its environment.
With respect to Standard #10, the gates and fence sections can be removed in the
future without impairment of the essential form and integrity of the historic property
and its environment.
RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the
Downtown West Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be it further,
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
10
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal
meets criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness with the
following condition(s):
• the Secretary of the Commission shall review and approval the final selected
fencing product prior to installation;
• the fence shall be independently supported with no attachments to the historic
residences at 310 and 314 West State.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: D. Kramer
Seconded by: K. Olson
In Favor: S. Gibian, S. Stein, D. Kramer, K. Olson, A. Smith, E. Finegan
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: 0
Vacancies: 1
Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner’s representative to bring to the attention
of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans, including but not limited to changes
required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as
construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop
work order or revocation of the building permit.
Chair E. Finegan next invited the applicants to discuss the proposals regarding portable toilets.
M. McElroy said the proposal is to provide several temporary portable toilets that will be
maintained by a professional service provider. It’s a collaborative project between several non-
profits serving chronically homeless/ unhoused individuals who lack access to bathroom
facilities, particularly during the pandemic. With no access to public restrooms, public spaces
become restrooms, which is what is happening up and down State Street and in several
surrounding blocks as well. She said they are proposing to deploy them at their building because
they feel they are vitally necessary, and believe they are supported by the local health
department. She said theyvare willing to host them when other agencies are either prohibited
from doing so or are unwilling to assume the liability. She said they are not historic in any way.
They are injection molded plastic, either blue or green, sometimes beige. The dimensions for the
two units proposed are included in the application. One is standard, and the other is an accessible
unit. They will be monitored during the day, but unmonitored after hours. Funding has been
secured to service them twice weekly, three times weekly, if necessary, so they do not become a
public nuisance.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
11
B. McCracken said that temporary installations do not usually require approvals if they are up for
less than 180 days, but because there’s no end in sight to the pandemic, these may end up
installed longer than that, so he thought it best if the Commission reviewed the proposal.
M. McElroy said the funding has been secured to have them up longer than 6 months, but they
understand that 180 days is considered temporary per the regulations, and that is the ask at this
time.
K. Olson asked what public facilities that would have been open overnight have closed because
of the pandemic.
M. McElroy said one of the primary ones is the Shortstop Deli. She also mentioned the State
Street Diner and several gas station bathrooms. Public service providers and other such places
are also not accessible at this time.
K. Olson asked if the neighbors are aware of this proposal, noting it wasn’t referenced in any of
the letters.
M. McElroy said she thought Teresa Halpert had written in favor of the proposal.
A. Smith asked if they would remain as long as the pandemic persists.
J. Barry said it’s his understanding that if they want to keep them past 180 days, they would have
to return for another approval.
A. Smith said the end of the pandemic is somewhat vague. He said even if we’re all vaccinated
in 6 months, the infection might still be out there. He asked if there a way to be more specific.
B. McCracken said that he was thinking of this as an issue the Commission could regularly
revisit as needed.
D. Fleming asked why DSS is unable to host them.
M. McElroy said that even though they might be willing to, they can’t because they are located
on County property, and the County won’t allow them. The reason that STAP was approached is
that the City and the County both declined.
K. Olson asked B. McCracken if there’s anyone else in the City to weigh in on this. She said it
seems like it’s way more than an aesthetic issue. She said it seems like there could be
neighborhood impacts. She expressed concern over them being open when there’s no
supervision.
B. McCracken said it’s being discussed by the BPW and other bodies at City Hall. He said he
believes the IURA is a funding partner for the project, and he said it is being discussed and
people are aware of it as a solution to an ongoing problem. He said he shares her concerns that
it’s outside of the ILPC’s typical purview, and noted City Hall in general supports the proposal.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
12
Chair E. Finegan asked if the ILPC is just stating that they don’t object and if the final approval
for it will come from someone else.
B. McCracken asked the applicants if they had been told they needed any other approvals from
the City.
M. McElroy said it’s her understanding that they would not need any other approvals because it
is on private property.
K. Olson said she wants someone to make the case that this falls under the Commission’s
purview under the law because she said she can imagine neighbors pushing back saying they
didn’t follow their own legal parameters.
Chair E. Finegan said they can look at it as a temporary installation and revisit it in 180 days, and
address those issues – if they come up – at that time.
B. McCracken agreed and said they would have to return every 6 months. He said the way he
thinks the Commission should look at it is that there are temporary installations in historic
districts all the time. Temporary installations go up in the Arts Quad every year for graduation,
and in private homes, portable AC units go in windows for cooling seasonally. This might be a
larger temporary installation than what the ILPC typically considers, but it is temporary, and the
Commission has the authority to ensure it remains temporary.
D. Fleming said she thinks one typically needs a permit to put a portable toilet in a front yard.
She asked what the normal permit process is.
B. McCracken said he would have to look into that. He said for construction, he thinks it’s
usually addressed in the Site Plan approval, but otherwise, he’s not sure.
D. Kramer asked about procedure. He asked if the applicant could just put them there if the
Commission tabled the item.
B. McCracken said he will look through the City’s eCode while they continue discussion.
K. Olson agreed, and asked why they are in front of the Commission if they don’t require ILPC
approval.
D. Kramer said he understands the necessity, but he would prefer they were on City or County
property.
S. Gibian said he referred to T. Halpert’s letter, and she said she supports the toilets. He asked if
the Salvation Army is part of the consortium of groups working on this issue. He suggested their
parking lot kitty-corner from Shortstop as a well-lit, alternate location.
M. McElroy said that in truth, she would not object to locating them elsewhere. She said she
does not want to have to manage them, but she does feel there’s a compelling community need,
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
13
and one of STAP’s roles is to meet those needs – particularly ones that other service providers
choose not to.
S. Gibian asked if the Salvation Army had been asked.
M. McElroy said they are part of the team, and it is her impression they probably had been
asked, although she was not present for that conversation.
K. Olson said there is a clear public need and she finds it concerning that the City and the County
aren’t stepping up but are rather pushing it off on a non-profit. She again expressed concern for
impacts on neighbors.
M. McElroy said that they also own one of the neighboring properties, and that she thinks the
staff at DSS would be supportive as their clients also need facilities. She said City Health and the
neighboring building are vacant, and farther down the block is CARS, and they are aware of this
proposal.
B. McCracken shared the language from the Landmarks Ordinance:
§ 228-5 Temporary improvements.
Ch 228: Landmarks Preservation
No certificate of appropriateness is required for temporary improvements.
Temporary improvements are those that will be in place for no more than 180
consecutive days and result in no permanent physical alteration of the structure or
site.
B. McCracken said he brought the issue in front of the Commission because he thought it likely
they will be there longer than 180 days.
D. Kramer said he would like the Commission to not vote on this, and he would like D. Fleming
to raise the issue with the City, the County, and the Salvation Army, and see if they could find a
more suitable place.
D. Fleming said she could talk to the County Health Department tomorrow, and she noted that
it’s not the job of Shortstop or the Library either. She said we’re learning that those were stop-
gap solutions that were closed.
D. Kramer said there’s clearly a need, probably for more than two.
Chair E. Finegan asked if they can go ahead and install these, but only for 180 days. He asked
what the Commission can do after that.
B. McCracken said after 180 days, it’s no longer considered temporary, and they can ask STAP
remove them and restore the site to its prior condition, or they could again table it, continue to
treat it like a temporary installation, and allow it to remain.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
14
K. Olson said she’s concerned that this doesn’t seem like the safest location for an unsupervised
bathroom at 2 a.m. She said she thinks other parts of the City need to weigh in. She said the City
locks bathrooms at night because leaving them open creates a liability/ safety issue.
Resolution ~TABLED~
The Commission thanked the applicants for their important work in the community.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST
Chair E. Finegan opened Public Comment.
There being no members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, and no written comments
submitted to be read aloud, Chair E. Finegan closed Public Comment.
III. NEW BUSINESS
• Collegetown Innovation District PUD
B. McCracken briefly discussed the proposed PUD, saying it would involve constructing 10-
story buildings adjacent to the Grandview House and the Snaith House, both locally designated
landmarks. It would also impact the non-designated No. 9 Firehouse.
He asked the Commission members to review the publically available information, as they would
have an opportunity to weigh in on the project.
• 401 E. State Street
B. McCracken alerted the Commission to a large mixed-use development proposed for the
vacant lot to the east of the Gateway Plaza building, saying they would be asked to give
feedback, as it is adjacent to the East Hill Historic district (across from the Argos Inn).
III. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
• Review: 2020 Staff-Level Certificates of Appropriateness
B. McCracken reported that Staff-Level approvals were down about 60 percent due to the 2020
pandemic.
• Zoning Appeal Advisory Review: 613 East State Street, East Hill Historic District
The Commission generally supports the variance. S. Gibian suggested they improve the driveway,
which seems deteriorated.
Approved by ILPC: 16, February 2021
15
• Invitation to Attend Cornell Class Presentation
B. McCracken reported that Michael Tomlan’s class surveyed historic houses on South Hill and will
be presenting findings at a class tomorrow evening tomorrow at 7:15 p.m. Commission members
were invited to attend.
• Annual Sexual Harassment Training requirement
B. McCracken reminded the Commission members to either complete the materials sent out by the
City HR Department or submit a certificate of completion of a comparable training from their
employers by the end of the year.
V. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by S. Stein, seconded by D. Kramer, the meeting was adjourned by unanimous
consent at 7:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner