Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2008-08-14Approved by ILPC – 09/11/08 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission August 14, 2008 Present: Kristen Brennan George Holets Susan Jones Lynn Truame Mary Tomlan, Common Council Liaison Leslie Chatterton, Staff Acting Chair L. Truame called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the legal notices for the public hearings. I. PUBLIC HEARING A. 127 Terrace Place, East Hill Historic District – proposal to construct new retaining wall and repair existing stone retaining wall. Property owners Cindy Reid and Al Micucci were present to address the Commission. Based on advice from a landscape contractor the material for the rear retaining wall will be landscape timbers, the most practical material due the need to reduce the degree of excavation necessary to access the tight project area and reduce impacts due to proximity of the project area to the residence. 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 K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets. RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets WHEREAS, 127 Terrace Place is located in the East 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 owner Cindy Reid for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the construction of a new retaining wall and the repair of an existing retaining wall, 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 documentation submitted by Cindy Reid, including the following: • a narrative description of the proposal dated June 26, 2008 1 J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\Minutes\2008\0814.doc ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 • a survey map of 127 Terrace Place dated January 20, 1993 showing the proposed location of the new retaining wall and the location of the existing stone retaining wall • a narrative description of the proposal including a section sketch of the proposed retaining wall dated July 20, 2008 • photographs showing the proposed materials, Llenroc stone and the 6” x 6” landscape timbers, • two sketches of the proposed timber retaining wall showing structural support and the placement of cross beams, 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 August 14, 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 East Hill Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s East Hill Historic District Summary Significance Statement as 1830-1932. Constructed within the district’s period of significance and retaining a relatively high level of integrity, 127 Terrace Place is a contributing element of the East Hill Historic District. As addressed in the narratives dated June 26, 2008 and July 31, 2008 and shown on the survey map of the property, the proposal involves the construction of a retaining wall along the back and southeast corner of the house. The retaining wall would be constructed of 6” by 6”pressure- treated timber beams. The first section of the wall would be four feet tall. The second section would be stepped back several feet from the first section and would be three feet tall. As described in the narrative dated July 31, 2008 and shown on the survey map of the property, the proposal also involves the repair of an existing stone retaining wall. Deteriorated sections of the existing wall will be removed and replaced with Llenroc stone and mortar to match the existing wall. The purpose of the proposal is to control erosion and prevent run-off water from entering the basement. -2- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 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. #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where 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. #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 described in the narrative description dated July 31, 2008, the repair of the existing stone retaining wall will not remove historic materials or alter features and spaces that characterize the property in keeping with Standard #2. The proposed Llenroc stone will match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities in keeping with Standard #6. As shown on the survey map of the property, the construction of the retaining wall will not remove historic materials or alter features and spaces that characterize the property in keeping with Standard #2. -3- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 As described in the narrative description dated July 31, 2008, the construction of the retaining wall will not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. As shown in the section sketch incorporated in the July 31, 2008 narrative, the sketch showing structural placement, the sketch showing placement of cross beams, and the accompanying photographs of proposed building materials, the retaining wall is differentiated as a new element that 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 retaining wall will not impair the essential form and integrity of the 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 East Hill Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-4E (1)(a) of the Municipal Code, 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 4-0-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 B. 810 East Seneca Street, 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 G. Holets, seconded by S. Jones. RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Jones, seconded by K. Brennan WHEREAS, 810 East Seneca Street is located in the East Hill Historic District as provided for in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and -4- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by Brian Yonkin of Yonkin Construction for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the extension of the existing fire escape to grade, 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, at the meeting held on August 14, 2008, the ILPC reviewed the submitted documentation dated July 14, 2008, including a City of Ithaca Building Permit Application for 810 East Seneca Street and a photocopied photograph of the property showing the existing fire escape, 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 August 14, 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 East Hill Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s East Hill Historic District Summary of Significance Statement as 1830-1932. Constructed between 1882 and 1893, the house retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance and is a contributing element of the East Hill Historic District. The proposal involves the extension of the existing fire escape from the roof of the porch to the ground on the east side of the building. The purpose of the proposal is to meet Building Code requirements for emergency egress. In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new construction or demolition in historic districts, -5- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 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. #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 submitted narrative, the extension of the fire escape system does not entail removal of historic materials that characterize the property, in keeping with Standard #2. Serving an exclusively functional purpose to provide a safe means of egress in case of fire or other hazardous circumstance, the fire escape system is not a prominent feature of the building’s architectural character. The proposal does not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work is differentiated from the old and is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment, in keeping with Standard #9 As described in the submitted documentation, the attachment of the new ladder to the building will 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, in keeping with Standard #10. -6- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 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 ILPC approves the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 4-0-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 C. 934 Stewart Avenue, Cornell Heights Historic District – proposals to demolish and reconstruct entrance walkways on east façade, to cover an existing walkway on the north façade, and to demolish and pave the area of the existing free standing carport. Property owner Joe Quigley was present to address the Commission. The Commission acted on the three components of the proposal in the order shown below. (1) Proposal to cover an existing walkway on the north facade 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 S. Jones, seconded by G. Holets. RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets WHEREAS, 934 Stewart Avenue is located in the Cornell Heights Historic District as provided for in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, 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 Joseph Quigley, and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is a proposal to extend the roof at the north side of the building to cover an existing walkway and to construct a hand rail, and -7- ILPC Minutes August 14, 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 material submitted by J. Quigley, including a narrative description of the proposal received 08/11/08, a certified survey map of the property showing the building, site and area of the covered walk, two sketches labeled “Proposed Covered Walkway” showing the side and front views, photocopied photographs of the existing condition, and the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form completed in 1987 by Judith Dulberger, 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, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 14, 2008, the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • The period of significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District is 1898 – 1937. • According to the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, the apartments at 934 Stewart Avenue were constructed between 1946 and 1956, outside the district’s period of significance. • Constructed outside the district’s period of significance the residence is a “non-contributing “element of the Cornell Heights Historic District meaning that is does not add to the community’s understanding of the history, architecture or significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District. • The proposal involves the construction of a roof extending from the existing roof to cover the existing walkway on the north side of the building. The roof will be covered with a rubber membrane, will have a ceiling containing recessed lighting and will include a railing to be in-filled with (either uprights or lattice). • The purpose is to improve comfort and safety of the property by providing protection from inclement weather and preventing snow and ice build-up on the walk. -8- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 WHEREAS, in its evaluation the Commission has considered the following: The residence is a “non-contributing” element of the Cornell Heights Historic District. The site of the apartment building is physically and visually separated from the more densely settled area of Cornell Heights, thus reducing the impact of the alteration on the historic district. The proposed covered walkway is utilitarian in design and in keeping with the size and scale of the property. The proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical or architectural significance and value of the historic as set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a) of the Municipal Code, 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 4-0-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 (2) Proposal to demolish and pave the area of the existing free standing carport 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 K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets. RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Jones, seconded by G. Holets WHEREAS, 934 Stewart Avenue is located in the Cornell Heights Historic District as provided for in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and -9- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 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 Joseph Quigley, and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the demolition of a six bay shed, located at the rear of the property and used for parking, 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 material submitted by J. Quigley, including a narrative description of the proposal received 08/11/08, a certified survey map of the property showing location of the shed/”garage” photocopied photographs of the existing condition, and the New York State Building- Structure Inventory Form completed in 1987 by Judith Dulberger, 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, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 14, 2008, the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • The period of significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District is 1898 – 1937. • According to the New York State Building–Structure Inventory Form, the apartments at 934 Stewart Avenue were constructed between 1946 and 1956, outside the district’s period of significance. • Constructed outside the district’s period of significance the residence is a “non-contributing “element of the Cornell Heights Historic District meaning that is does not add to the community’s understanding of the history, architecture or significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District. • The proposal involves the demolition of the six bay concrete and wood shed, repair of the existing retaining wall, and paving of the area for parking. • The purpose is to remove the deteriorated structure. -10- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 WHEREAS, in its evaluation the Commission has considered the following: The residence is a “non-contributing” element of the Cornell Heights Historic District. The site of the apartment building is physically and visually separated from the more densely settled area of Cornell Heights, thus reducing the impact of the alteration on the historic district. The footprint of the shed does not appear in the Sanborn Fire Insurance Co. Map 1940, and therefore is also not considered to be a contributing element of the Cornell Heights Historic District. The demolition of the shed will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical or architectural significance and value of the historic district as set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a) of the Municipal Code, 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 4-0-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 (3) Proposal to demolish and reconstruct entrance walkways on east façade After lengthy discussion of the proposal as presented the application was tabled as agreed to by the applicant. ILPC members asked the applicant to consider metal construction in contrast to the proposed wooden structure. It was agreed by the ILPC that a metal structure would be visually “lighter” and would therefore be less obtrusive at the building’s street side entrances. The applicant stated that he had intended to engage the services of an architect. The applicant and the ILPC agreed he would return to the ILPC upon completion of the design work. D. DeWitt Place, East Hill Historic District – proposal to reconstruct roadway/fire lane Property owner Pamela Johnston and her attorney Ray Schlather were present to address the Commission. -11- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 ILPC members discussed the proposal with the applicant, focusing on the road width and the demolition of the piers at the entrance to the street. ILPC members stated that in order to maintain the historic feeling and association of DeWitt Place, the width of the roadbed should be restricted to the minimum acceptable for fire access. ILPC members also noted that there appeared to be a stone foundation visible under at least one of the piers and suggested that if feasible consideration be given to incorporating any extant historic material into the roadbed. 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 K. Brennan, seconded by S. Jones. RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Jones, second by K. Brennan WHEREAS, the DeWitt Place is a private street located in the City of Ithaca’s East 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 Pamela Johnston for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the repaving and widening of DeWitt Place, 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 narrative description of the proposal dated August 11, 2008, a certified survey map showing existing conditions, and the City of Ithaca East Hill Historic District Summary Significance Statement, 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 August 14, 2008, and WHEREAS, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: -12- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 The period of significance for the area now known as the East Hill Historic District is identified in the Summary Significance Statement as 1830 – 1932, and Constructed within the district’s period of significance DeWitt Place is significant as the environmental context for historic resources adjacent to the roadway, The applicant owns 105 – 117 DeWitt Place, comprising the total number of properties on DeWitt Place. As addressed in the narrative dated August 11, 2008, Phase I, the proposal is to level the road and parking area, widen the roadbed from 12 feet to 15 feet, remove the concrete block pillars at the south end of the roadbed, and remove remaining curbing of the west side of the road. Phase II to commence in 2009 involves surfacing the roadbed with asphalt, and Phase III will bring in conformance the west side of DeWitt Place with the anticipated settlement of a legal dispute. The project will preserve the existing tree line on the west side of the roadbed and the grassy area between the sidewalk and the roadbed on the east side. The purpose of the proposal is to restore the deteriorated road surface and to create a minimum 15’ width fire lane for emergency vehicles. 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. #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 -13- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. At a meeting held on July 24, 2008 with the owner, the Ithaca Fire Department and the Building Department and the City Attorney it was determined that the main issue with the proposal is fire access to the properties on DeWitt Place. The Fire Department has determined that the fire lane must be a minimum of 15 feet wide, an increase to the existing roadbed of 3 feet. The proposal calls for removal of the pillars at the south end of the road. These pillars are constructed of concrete block and are not features that characterize the property as stated in Standard #2. The proposal calls for increasing the width of the road from 12 feet to 15 feet, the minimum acceptable to the Fire Department, and preserves the existing tree line on the west side and the 3 – 4 foot grassy area between the sidewalk and the roadbed on the east side, avoiding alteration of spaces that characterize a property in-keeping with Standard #2, Impacts of proposed widening of the street from 12 to 15 feet are mitigated by preservation of the existing tree line on the west side of the road bed and on the east side retention of a 3 to 4 foot grassy area between the sidewalk and the roadbed. With these mitigation measures, the new work is differentiated from the old and is compatible in size and scale to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. in keeping with Standard #9. 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) of the Municipal Code, 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 with the following condition: Photographic documentation and, if possible, preservation of existing base of pillars incorporated into the roadbed surface RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 4-0-0 -14- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones 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 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – April 10, 2008, May 13, 2008, June 12, 2008 On a motion by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets, the minutes from the April 10, 2008, May 13, 2008, and June 12, 2008 meetings were approved without corrections by vote of the ILPC. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. 418-428 Eddy Street, East Hill Historic District – proposal to replace doors at 426 Eddy Street RESOLUTION: Moved by G. Holets, 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 entrance doors at 426 Eddy Street, 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 -15- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 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, at the public hearing held at the regularly scheduled meeting on May 13th the ILPC determined that the application failed to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standard #9 and denied the application set forth in Section 228-4E(1)(a); and WHEREAS, at the meeting held on June 12, 2008 the ILPC considered and approved a revised proposal described in detail in an e-mail submitted by the applicant, dated 6/4/08 and detailing modifications to the original proposal that would educe the adverse effects of alterations intended to improve the safety and security of tenants, and WHEREAS due to practical limitations of the space, it was not possible to execute the revised proposal as approved, and WHEREAS, at the meeting held on July 10, 2008 the ILPC reviewed additional documentation dated July 10, 2008, including a photograph titled “Existing Entry Doors, a sketch plan titled “Overview, Existing Entry Doors” a catalogue “cut sheet” of the proposed door, a sketch titled “Proposed Entry Door”, a sketch plan titled “Overview Proposed Entry Door”, a catalogue “cut sheet” with specifications for the intercom system and a “cut sheet” with specifications for the proximity reader, and WHEREAS, The details of the modified proposal are shown on project documentation dated July 10, 2008 and described as follows: • Replacement of paired 24” wide doors shown on “Existing Entry Doors” and “Overview Existing Entry” with a single 36”x 96” Lemieux brand Artisan exterior #501 oak door stained dark with a single clear glass light. • Installation of an electronic lock, a proximity reader and intercom speaker, reuse of the existing painted steel jams, wood door trim and existing brass pull handle and plate and installation of a brass lock cylinder for emergency key access. • Reconfiguring the entrance to eliminate the existing recess by moving the transom and door forward to the same plane as existing doors south and north of the subject door as shown on the submitted material, “Overview Existing Entry Door” and ”Overview Proposed Entry Door. This reconfiguration will provide adequate clearance for a -16- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 person to open the “in-swinging” door without having to step back onto the stairway. • As shown on the sketch “Proposed Entry Door”, the existing transom window will fill the opening over the door and the existing door opening will be reduced with the addition of 4 – 4 1/2” wood panels on either side to accommodate the difference in width between the proposed 36” door and the paired 24” doors, and WHEREAS, the proposed relocation of the entry to remove the recess into which the door is currently placed, was a modification opposed by some members especially in combination with the other alterations listed above, and WHEREAS, ILPC members and staff agreed to work with the applicant and the City of Ithaca Building Department to explore solutions that would allow retention of the entry in its current location and preservation of the spatial relationship created by the recessed center entrance, and WHEREAS, the ILPC postponed further consideration of the proposal, and WHEREAS, at the meeting held on August 14, 2008 the ILPC resumed consideration of the application and the new proposal to install the door to swing outward, a configuration that enables retention of the recessed entry, and WHEREAS, The purpose of the proposal is to increase the safety of egress for the upper floor apartments, to make necessary security upgrades, including allowing 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 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. -17- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 #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 of 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. 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. The revised proposal does not involve relocation of the entry to the same plane as adjacent doors and avoids removal of the recess considered to be a space that characterizes the property, in keeping with Standard #2. The proposed entry features such as the centered 36” entry door as shown on sheet “Proposed Entry Door”, the Lemieux #501 oak door, the electronic reader for the electronic lock, and intercom panel are features that differentiate the new work from the old and that are compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment in keeping with Standard #9. Installation of the new door and infill construction as shown in the submitted sheets “Overview Existing Entry Doors”, “Proposed Entry Door”, and “Overview Proposed Entry Door” are proposed to 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 in keeping with Standard #10. 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, with the following conditions. Staff shall document whether the door is hinged to swing out right or left. -18- ILPC Minutes August 14, 2008 Staff shall document final placement of the security features including the proximity reader and the intercom system. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 4-0-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets S. Jones L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 B. Milstein Hall – Environmental Impact Statement L. Chatterton reported that the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for Milstein Hall is now available for review in the Planning Department. The Planning Board will hold a special meeting on the DEIS on Tuesday, September 9, 2008. The ILPC has been asked to comment on the document, and all comments are needed by September 3, 2008 to forward for consideration by the Planning Board at its meeting. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Common Council liaison Mary Tomlan informed the ILC about the availability of surplus construction brick resulting from a project undertaken by the City’s Water and Sewer Department. VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:43 p.m. by Acting Chair L. Truame. Respectfully Submitted, Leslie A. Chatterton, Secretary Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission -19-