HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2024-10-15Approved on: January 21, 2025
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Minutes –October 15, 2024
Commission Member Present: Ed Finegan, Chair
Janet Smith, Member
Stephen Gibian, Member
Susan Stein, Member
Katelin Olson, Member
Avi Smith, Member
Absent: David Kramer, Vice Chair
Common Council Members Present: Clyde Lederman, Common Council Liaison
City Staff Present: Bryan McCracken, Hist. Pres. and Neighborhood
Planner & Secretary, ILPC
Yamila Fournier, Senior Planner
_______________________________________________________________________
The regular monthly meeting of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was held in
Common Council Chambers, Third Floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, and also conducted
remotely using videoconferencing technology. Virtual participation in public meetings is
authorized by Part WW of Chapter 56 of the Laws of 2022 of New York State and Local Law
2022-05. The proceedings were livestreamed on the City of Ithaca Public Meetings channel on
YouTube and a recording is available here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8lF6oY8T4Q
Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m. and read the Public Notice.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 625 University Avenue, University Hill Historic District – Proposal to Remove and
Infill the Basement Entrance on the North Elevation and Infill a Subterranean Room
Beneath the North Side Yard.
Spencer Rayne, Rocco Design, appeared virtually before the Commission to present the
proposed project on behalf of the property owner. 625 University Avenue is a contributing
resource in the locally designated University Hill Historic District.
After a brief summary of the project by S. Rayne, the Commission requested additional
information on the age of the root cellar, the detailing of the foundation repairs, and the process
for removing and infilling the root cellar and basement stairs.
PUBLIC HEARING
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by S. Stein, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
Approved on: January 21, 2025
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 K. Olson,
seconded by J. Smith.
The Commission discussed the detailing of an adjacent infilled window on this elevation and the
need to recess the stone in the proposed infill location based on this earlier alteration. The
members also discussed precedent for such recessed infill panel at other historic properties in the
City.
RESOLUTION: 625 University Avenue, University Hill Historic District – Proposal to
Remove and Infill the Basement Entrance on the East Elevation and Infill a Subterranean Room
Beneath the East Side Yard.
WHEREAS, 625 University Avenue is located within the University Hill Historic District, as
designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 2003, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness dated September 9, 2024, was submitted for review
to the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Spencer Rayne on
behalf of property owner Richmond Property Group, including the following: (1)
two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons
for Changes(s); (2) a sketch of the proposed alteration; (3)an existing
conditions/demolition plan photograph; (3) three other photographs documenting
exiting conditions; (4) a written description of the proposed material; and (5) three
photographs of the proposed materials , and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the entry in the annotated list of properties included within
the University Hill Historic District for 625 University Avenue, and the City of
Ithaca’s University Hill Historic District Summary Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves
the removal of the non-historic wood, shed-roof structure; the removal and infill
with soil of the concrete stairway; the removal and infill with concrete masonry
units and stone the basement entrance; and the removal of a subterranean storage
room. The work area is on the east elevation, 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 on: January 21, 2025
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 October 15, 2024, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and
the proposal:
The period of significance for the area now known as the University Hill Historic
District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s University Hill Historic District
Summary Significance Statement as 1867-1927.
As indicated in the entry in the annotated list of properties included within the
University Hill Historic District, the Alpha Tau Omega Lodge at 625 University
Avenue was constructed in the Italian-Renaissance-Revival Style in 1901.
Constructed within the period of significance of the University Hill Historic
District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing
element of the University Hill Historic District.
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.
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
Approved on: January 21, 2025
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
basement entrance and the subterranean storage room will remove distinctive
materials but will not alter features and spaces that characterize the property. In
making this determination, the Commission considered the age of the basement
entrance and subterranean storage room and their visibility from the public way.
These elements were likely installed during the historic district’s period of
significance and, therefore, likely, possess historic features and materials.
However, these features and materials are almost entirely below grade, giving
them minimal visibility from the public way. As such, they do not significantly
contribute to the historic aesthetic quality of the property or the historic district as
a whole, and their removal will not have a substantial impact.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed door infill is
compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the 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 University Hill 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 stone infill shall be inset a minimum of 1” from the face of the foundation to
differentiate the new from the old and preserve the visual record of the likely
original window opening.
• ILPC staff shall review and approve the proposed stone infill material prior to the
commencement of work.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: S. Gibian
Seconded by: S. Stein
In Favor: K. Olson, J. Smith, S. Stein, A. Smith, E. Finegan, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: D. Kramer
Vacancies: 0
Approved on: January 21, 2025
II. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST
No members of the public appeared before the Commission to speak, and no written comments
were submitted in advance of the meeting to be read aloud.
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. 315 North Cayuga Street-First Presbyterian Church, DeWitt Park Historic District–
Proposal to Construct a Barrier Free Access Ramp on the West Elevation.
Kirianne Weaver, Reverend, First Presbyterian Church, submitted a request to extend the review
period for the Certificate of Appropriateness application for the project noted above.
RESOLUTION: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION REVIEW
EXTENSION, THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, 315 NORTH CAYUGA
STREET, DeWITT PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT –PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A
BARRIER-FREE ACCESS RAMP ON THE WEST ELEVATION
WHEREAS, The First Presbyterian Church, 315 North Cayuga Street, is located within the
DeWitt Park Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal
Code in 1971, and listed on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places in
1971, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-7(F) of the Municipal Code, “The Commission shall
approve, deny, or approve with conditions or modifications the Certificate of Appropriateness
within 45 days from the completion of the public hearing, unless an extension is mutually agreed
upon in writing by the applicant and the Commission,” and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a
Certificate of Appropriateness, dated May 24, 2024, was submitted for review to the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by property owner First Presbyterian Church, and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on July 16, 2024, the Commission made a finding of fact
that the circumstances of the application required further time for additional study and
information than could be obtained within the aforesaid 45-day period and extended the review
period to 90 days as permitted by Section 228-7(F) (1) the Commission, and
WHERERAS, the applicant was unable to produce the requested additional information within
the 90 day review period, and
WHEREAS, a written request for a 90-day extension of the Certificate of Appropriateness
review period for this project was submitted to the ILPC by Kirianne E. Weaver on behalf of the
First Presbyterian Church, 315 North Cayuga Street, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC agrees to the requested 90-day extension of the Certificate of
Appropriateness review period, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the 90-day period commences at the time of the adoption of this resolution.
Approved on: January 21, 2025
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: S. Stein
Seconded by: J. Smith
In favor: K. Olson, J. Smith, S. Stein, A. Smith, E. Finegan, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: D. Kramer
Vacancies: 0
B. 102 Triphammer Road, Cornell Heights Historic District – Proposal to Replace Five
Windows Enclosing the Front (Southeast) Porch.
Property owner and applicant Alex Susskind appeared before the Commission to continue the
review of the proposal noted above. Commission members discussed their observations of the
subject windows made at the Site Visit on October 8, 2024, and the impact of these observations
on the review of the proposal.
RESOLUTION: 102 Triphammer Road, Cornell Heights Historic District – Proposal to
Replace Five Windows Enclosing the Front (Southeast) Porch
WHEREAS, 102 Triphammer Road 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 August 8, 2024, was submitted for review to
the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by property owner Alex
Susskind, including the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled
Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); (2) a job
description from Renewal by Andersen®; (3) three photographs documenting
existing conditions; and (4) two sheets of product information on Renewal by
Anderson® windows, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form
for 102 Triphammer Road, 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 replacement of five historic windows enclosing a porch on the primary
(southeast) facade, 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
Approved on: January 21, 2025
Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required,
and
WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate
the 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 September 17, 2024, 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
Craftsman Style residence at 102 Triphammer Road was constructed between
1916 and 1917 for a Cornell University Professor of soil technology.
Constructed within the period of significance of the Cornell Heights Historic
District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing
element of the Cornell Heights Historic District.
The subject windows exhibit the characteristic of historic wood storm sash and
were likely installed to more permanently enclose a likely three-season porch.
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:
Approved on: January 21, 2025
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 #1 A property shall be used for its intended historic purpose or be
placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining
characteristics of the building and its site and environment.
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 #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than
replaced. When the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture,
and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials. Replacement of
missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial
evidence.
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 proposed window
replacements will remove distinctive materials but will not alter features and
spaces that characterize the property.
With respect to Principle #2 and Standard #1, the storm sash do not meet the needs
of the year-round use of the interior space and their proposed replacement is a
minimal change to accommodate the current use. In its review, the ILPC noted that
the existing windows were likely storm sash based on their thickness, functionality,
and their physical differences to the residence’s primary sash. As storm sash, these
units were never intended to function as primary sash and, therefore, do not meet
the needs of the interior program today. The Commission also considered that the
space was converted to year-round use prior to the current owner’s purchase.. The
owners have attempted to preserve the sash through regular maintenance and
modest interior modifications; however, this work only partially addressed the
issues associated with windows, including functionality, and no further opinions
exist that will preserve the sash and fully address their shortcomings.
Approved on: January 21, 2025
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed windows are
compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the 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 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):
• Product specifications and cut sheets for the selected window product shall be
submitted to the ILPC for consideration and approval prior to the issuance of a
Building Permit for the window replacements.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: K. Olson
Seconded by: J. Smith
In Favor: K.Olson, J. Smith, S. Stein, A. Smith, E. Finegan, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: D. Kramer
Vacancies: 0
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
No draft minutes were reviewed by the Commission.
V. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by S. Stein, the meeting was adjourned unanimously at 6:36
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner