HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2008-06-12Approved by ILPC – 08/14/08
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
June 12, 2008
Present:
Kristen Brennan
George Holets
Susan Jones
Susan Stein
Lynn Truame
Mary Tomlan, Common Council Liaison
Leslie Chatterton, Staff
Megan Gilbert, Staff
Acting Chair L. Truame called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm and read the legal notices for the
public hearings.
I. PUBLIC HEARING
A. 102 Triphammer Road, Cornell Heights Historic District – proposal to install fencing
No one was present to address the Commission.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets, Acting Chair L. Truame opened the
public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, the public hearing was
closed on a motion by G. Holets, seconded by S. Jones.
RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Brennan, seconded by S. Stein
WHEREAS, 102 Triphammer Road is located in the Cornell Heights Historic District
as provided for in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by property owners Alex
and Carrie Susskind for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission, (ILPC), and
WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the installation of a fence and
three gates, and
WHEREAS, the project 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 ILPC has reviewed the submitted documentation dated May 28, 2008
including a narrative description of the proposal submitted by Alex and
Carrie Susskind, a site survey showing the proposed location of the fence,
and product specifications for 3-rail Majestic style factory painted steel
fence, and
1
J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\Minutes\2008\0612.doc
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
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 a Certificate of
Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting
on June 12, 2008, and
WHEREAS, 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 Cornell Heights
Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s Cornell Heights
Historic District Summary Significance Statement as 1898-1937.
The house was constructed between 1916 and 1917.
Constructed within the district’s period of significance and
retaining a high level of integrity 102 Triphammer Road is a
contributing element of the Cornell Heights Historic District.
As addressed in the narrative dated May 28, 2008 and shown on
the submitted site survey, the proposal involves the installation of a
four-foot high, 3-rail, Majestic style steel fence along most of the
property line. The installation of three gates will allow access to
the carport, front walkway, and the driveway.
The purpose of the proposed fence is to create a safe play area.
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 228-4E (1)(a) of the Municipal Code.
In making this determination the Commission is guided by the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in
this case specifically the following Standards:
-2-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
#2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and
preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features
and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
#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.
#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.
As shown in the site survey, the installation of the 4-foot high, 3-rail,
Majestic style steel fence will not remove historic materials or alter
features and spaces that characterize the property in keeping with Standard
#2.
The addition of a fence to the property does not destroy historic materials
that characterize the property. The fence is differentiated as a new
element but is compatible in massing, size and scale to protect the historic
integrity of the property and its environment in keeping with Standard #9.
Future removal of the proposed fence will not impair the essential form
and integrity of the historic property and its environment in keeping with
Standard #10.
WHEREAS, 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 228-4E(1)(a), now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the
proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1)(a) of the
Municipal Code, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness.
RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0
Yes
K. Brennan
G. Holets
S. Jones
No
0
Abstain
0
-3-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
S. Stein
L. Truame
B. 414 Stewart Avenue, East Hill Historic District – proposal for window alteration
No one was present to address the Commission.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Brennan, seconded by S. Jones, Acting Chair L. Truame opened the
public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, the public hearing was
closed on a motion by S. Stein, seconded by G. Holets.
RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Stein, seconded by G. Holets,
WHEREAS, 414 Stewart Avenue is located in the East Hill Local Historic District,
designated as provided for in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, Landmarks
Preservation, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness has been
submitted by property owner Jeffrey C. Williams for review by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC), and
WHEREAS, the action under consideration is to replace a third floor window,
and
WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental
Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance and thus requires no further environmental review, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the documentation including a narrative
description of the proposal by Jeffrey C. Williams, Marvin Windows
Wood Casemaster product specifications, and photographs of the existing
window and building, 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 a Certificate of
Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting
on June 12, 2008, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property
and the proposal:
-4-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
• The period of significance for the area now known as the East Hill
Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s East Hill Historic District
Summary of Significance Statement as 1830-1932.
• Constructed prior to 1893, the house retains sufficient integrity to reflect
its historic and architectural significance and is a contributing element of the
East Hill Historic District.
WHEREAS, in its evaluation the Commission has considered the following:
The proposal involves the replacement of a third floor aluminum slider
window with a wood Marvin crank-out casement window to provide
emergency egress as required by building code. The original window
opening was “blocked in” to accommodate the existing window. The
existing window opens on to an existing fire escape.
The existing window measures 37’ wide by 35 ¾” high and is not large
enough to meet building code requirements for emergency egress. The
proposed window would be 37” wide by 4 ft. 8 9/16” high and would be
installed in the original window opening. The new window would be
painted to match the house.
At a building inspection on April 18, 2008, the City of Ithaca Building
Department required that the existing window be replaced with a larger
window to provide emergency egress to an existing fire escape.
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 228-4E (1)(a) of the Municipal
Code. In making this determination the Commission is guided by the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this
case specifically the following Standard:
#2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and
preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features
and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
#9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property.
-5-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
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.
#10 New additions and adjacent or related new constructions 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.
As shown in the photographs of the building, the existing window is not
original to the house and is not a feature that characterizes the property in
keeping with Standard #2.
As described in the narrative prepared by Jeffrey Williams the new
window will fit into the original window opening avoiding the alteration
of spaces that characterize the property in keeping with Standard #2.
The new window shall be differentiated from the old and shall be
compatible with the massing, size, and scale to protect the historic
integrity of the property and its environment, in keeping with Standard #9.
The new window will be installed with no alteration of the opening, so
that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic
property and its environment would unimpaired, in keeping with Standard
#10.
WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic,
historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic District, as
set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a); now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the
proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1)(a) of the
Municipal Code, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of
Appropriateness.
RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0
Yes
K. Brennan
G. Holets
S. Jones
S. Stein
L. Truame
No
0
Abstain
0
-6-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
C. 320 University Avenue, University Hill Historic District – proposal to replace roof
covering
No one was present to address the Commission.
Public Hearing
On a motion by G. Holets, seconded by K. Brennan, Acting Chair L. Truame opened the
public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, the public hearing was
closed on a motion by K. Brennan, seconded by S. Jones.
RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets,
WHEREAS, 320 University Avenue is located in the University Hill Historic District as
provided for in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for
a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by property owners
Katharine Lunde and Jeffrey Hanavan for review by the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and
WHEREAS, the action under consideration is a partial replacement of the
existing roof, and
WHEREAS, the project 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 ILPC has reviewed the submitted documentation including a the
completed Certificate of Appropriateness Application form signed by
Katharine Lunde and Jeff Hanovan, narrative description of the proposal
from Katharine Lunde dated June 4, 2008 and photographs of the existing
roof, 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 a Certificate of
Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting
on June 12, 2008, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property
and the proposal:
-7-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
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.
Constructed in 1907, the residence is architecturally significant as an
example of Arts and Crafts-style architecture with Tudor Revival-style
references. Originally the Wilder D. Bancroft Carriage House and Squash
Court, the building is historically significant for its relationship to the
Treman family and its prominence in the city’s early twentieth century
development. The property is also significant as one of a series of three
late 19th-early 20th century carriage houses on University Avenue.
Constructed within the district’s period of significance and
retaining a relatively high level of integrity, 320 University
Avenue is a contributing element of the University Hill Historic
District.
The proposal involves the replacement of approximately half of the
existing three-tab shingle and asbestos shingle with Timberline 30-year,
“weathered wood” architectural style shingle.
The purpose of the proposal is to remove and replace the existing
deteriorated three-tab shingle.
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 228-4E (1)(a) of the Municipal
Code. In making this determination the Commission is guided by the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this
case specifically the following Standards:
#2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and
preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features
and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
#5 Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or
examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be
preserved.
-8-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
#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.
As shown in the photographs of the property, the existing roof covering
including the ridge and hip line details is a distinctive feature that
characterizes the property in keeping with Standards #2 and #5.
WHEREAS, the proposal with conditions 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 228-4E(1)(a), now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the
proposal with conditions meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E
(1)(a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness
with the following conditions:
• All original ridge and hip detail shall be retained if not asbestos
and if asbestos then replaced with appropriate material to match the roof
covering.
• Staff approval of the color of architectural shingle.
RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0
Yes
K. Brennan
G. Holets
S. Jones
S. Stein
L. Truame
No
0
Abstain
0
II. PLEASURE OF THE CHAIR
A. Administrative Matters
None
B. Public Comment on Matters of Interest
None
C. Communications
-9-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, & Historic Preservation requesting ILPC
comment on nomination of 107 Giles Street to the National and State Registers of
Historic Places
RESOLUTION: Moved by G. Holets, seconded by S. Stein,
WHEREAS, in its capacity as a New York State Certified Local Government as
designated in 1986 by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and
Historic Preservation (PARKS), the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission (ILPC) is required to participate in the nomination process
for the Rufus and Flora Bates House at 107 Giles Street in the City of
Ithaca, currently under consideration for nomination to the State and
National Registers of Historic Places by the New York State Historic
Preservation Review Board, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC is specifically asked to prepare a report stating whether or not, in
its opinion, the property meets the criteria for listing on the NY State and
National Registers and that the city’s chief elected official, Mayor Carolyn
Peterson shall transmit the Commission’s report and her recommendation
to the State Historic Preservation Office, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has placed the item on the agenda of the June 12, 2008 meeting
routinely posted in City Hall, and
WHEREAS, documentation reviewed by the ILPC includes the letter dated April 18,
sent from Ruth Pierpont, Director of the Historic Preservation Field
Services Bureau at PARKS to ILPC Chair Alphonse Pieper and
accompanying material from PARKS including the National and State
Registers Criteria for Evaluation, and the draft National Register of
Historic Places Registration form completed by Anthony Opalka with
PARKS, and
WHEREAS, of the four criteria listed the nomination has been proposed under criteria
A and C as follows:
A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of our history.
C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period,
or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or
possesses high artistic values or represents a significant and
distinguishable entity whose components lack individual
distinction.
-10-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
WHEREAS, the ILPC concurs with Section number 8 of the draft National Register of
Historic Places Registration form, Statement of Significance and
specifically the statement
“This home has the distinction of being the former residence of
Rufus Bates, one of the early Presidents of the village of Ithaca and
community leader in Ithaca until his death in 1880.”
WHEREAS, in making a determination about whether Criterion A has been met the
ILPC has noted the following:
In addition to serving as president, Rufus Bates was a successful
businessman, and stock dealer, responsible for construction of the Bates
Block which is still in use as a commercial building. He advanced public
education as a member of Ithaca’s Board of Education, was a member of
two local fire companies, was a stockholder in the Ithaca & Athens and the
Geneva & Ithaca Railroads and served on the Board of Directors after the
two lines merged. During his tenure as president Ithaca began a program
of street paving, erected the first iron bridge across Six Mile Creek, and
opened Washington Park to the public. His commitment to public service
and community affairs was continued over 50 years after his death by his
wife Flora and daughter Annie May – all of which demonstrates the
contribution of the Bates family to events that have made a significant
contribution to the broad patterns of Ithaca’s history. (Criterion A.),
WHEREAS, the ILPC concurs with Section number 8 of the draft National Register of
Historic Places Registration form, Statement of Significance and
specifically the statement
“The property is also significant as a central New York Greek Revival
style rural house.”
WHEREAS, in making a determination about whether Criterion C has been met the
ILPC has noted the following:
The house is a representative example of the rural Greek Revival type with
its characteristic low-pitched gable roof, cornice line with wide frieze and
frieze windows, cornice returns on the gabled ends, recessed entry and
simple entablature of the door surround. The Bates house is set apart from
most examples of the style by the five-bay center entrance configuration
with the long side facing the street, in contrast to most examples
constructed on smaller village lots configured with the gable end facing
the street. Another distinctive feature is the original orientation of the
front of the house to Six Mile Creek, and presumably toward the “old
-11-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
road”, prior to construction of a new road adjacent to what had been the
back of the property – all of which demonstrates the embodiment of the
distinctive characteristics of the rural Greek Revival type and
characteristics of the period and method of construction, (Criterion C).
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the ILPC finds that the documentation
in the draft National Register nomination form demonstrates that the
Rufus and Flora Bates House at 107 Giles Street, Ithaca, meets criteria for
listing on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places,
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC recommends the listing of the Rufus and Flora Bates House
on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places.
RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0
Yes
K. Brennan
G. Holets
S. Jones
S. Stein
L. Truame
No
0
Abstain
0
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – none
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. 418-428 Eddy Street, East Hill Historic District – proposal to replace doors at 426 Eddy
Steet
RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Jones, seconded by K. Brennan,
WHEREAS, 418-428 Eddy Street is located in the East Hill Local Historic District,
designated as provided for in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, Landmarks
Preservation, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness has been
submitted by Sharon Marx on behalf of property owner Jason Fane for
review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC), and
WHEREAS, the action under consideration is to replace the front door at 426
Eddy Street, and
-12-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental
Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance and thus requires no further environmental review, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the documentation dated April 30, 2008 including
a narrative description of the proposal submitted by Sharon Marx,
photographs of the existing door, a sketch of the proposed door, and
product specifications for the proposed door, intercom, and electronic key
tag reader, 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 a Certificate of
Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting
on May 13, 2008, and
WHEREAS, the application failed to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard #9
and was therefore determined to have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic
District, as set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a); and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has agreed to consider a modified proposal in order to reduce the
adverse effects of alterations intended to improve the safety and security
of tenants, and
WHEREAS, in its evaluation the Commission has considered the following:
The proposal involves the replacement of paired 24” wide doors, each
with a clear glass light with a single 36” Lemieux brand Artisan exterior
#521 oak door with a single clear glass light. The proposed door would
have an electronic lock, and a proximity electronic reader will be installed
to the right of the door. An intercom system will also be installed either
directly above or below the electronic reader.
The purpose of the proposal is to make necessary security upgrades and
allow tenants to monitor who enters the building.
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
-13-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
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 228-4E (1)(a) of the Municipal
Code. In making this determination the Commission is guided by the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this
case specifically the following Standard:
#2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and
preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features
and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
#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.
In this case, the ILPC has also considered that the building houses student
apartments and the entrance is heavily used. The alterations to the
entrance are proposed in order to provide a level of safety and security
appropriate to the building’s residential use. This level of security is
difficult to achieve given the current configuration of the entrance and
lack of contemporary security devices such as the proposed intercom panel
and security reader.
Modifications to the proposal agreed upon by the applicant and the ILPC
will bring the proposed alteration closer to objectives of Standard #9 while
still allowing for the enhanced safety and security of tenants. These
measures, include:
1. the replacement door to be same width as the existing double doors -
48" wide x 96" tall
2. the replacement door to be centered on the opening, not to one side as
proposed
3. replacement door style is to be Lemieux brand Artisan exterior oak
door style # 501, not 521 as proposed
4. replacement door to be stained dark to match other oak doors on the
building
5. replacement door to have single clear glass (no bevel)....
6. reuse hardware where practical. New hardware to be as close to old
brass color as possible
7. intercom panel and proximity reader to be installed into wood panel
adjacent to door numbered 428 and will not directly face Eddy Street.
-14-
ILPC Minutes
June 12, 2008
WHEREAS, the proposal as revised will not have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic
District, as set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a); now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the
proposal as revised meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1)(a)
of the Municipal Code, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of
Appropriateness.
RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0
Yes
K. Brennan
G. Holets
S. Jones
S. Stein
L. Truame
No
0
Abstain
0
VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. on a motion by Acting Chair
L. Truame.
Respectfully Submitted,
Leslie A. Chatterton, Secretary
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
-15-