Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCarl Sagan and Ann Druyan vs Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and the City of IthacaHOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN 1, BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO SI SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14051 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA,, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLA C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA-, NEW YORK, Respondents RJ% E OF PETITION x No. 294/6 -- No. yy_ PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition of ANN DRUYAN and duly verified the 1989, and upon all prior papers 29th day of August, and proceedings herein and heretofore had, petitioners herein will apply to this Court at a Special Term thereof to be held at the Tompkins County Court House in the City of Ithaca, New York, on the 22nd day of September 1989, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of said day or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for a judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules reversing and annulling the determination of respondent herein, The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, made the 14th day of August, 1989, which designated the premises owned by petitioners and known as 900 Stewart Avenue a part of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District upon the ground that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and was not supported by substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: August ,2Q, 1989 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 ti HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents PETITION Index No. RJI No. J. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTY OF TOMPKINS: The petition of Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan respectfully alleges and shows to this Court as follows: 1. That petitioners are individuals residing at 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York. 2. That respondents Suzanne Lichtenstein, Paul Testa, Martha Preston, Alex Skutt, Barclay C. Jones, Elizabeth Whicher and Nancy Meltzer constituted the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission at a meeting of such municipal board conducted on August 14, 1989. That the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission is a duly appointed municipal board created under the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca as authorized by Section 96-a of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. 3. That respondent The City of Ithaca, New York, is a HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 municipal corporation having general governmental responsibility for the City of Ithaca, New York. 4. That petitioners are owners of premises known as 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, New York, which consists of a residential dwelling constructed between 1978 and 1981 on the north rim of Fall Creek Gorge. 5. That petitioners' premises were formerly owned by the Sphinx Head Society, a fraternal organization of Cornell University students which constructed a windowless tomb -like masonry structure upon the premises in the 1920's. 6. That petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, remodelled the structure originally built by the Sphinx Head Society and annexed to it the residential building which presently comprises petitioners' residence. 7. That following the remodelling work performed by petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, the windowless tomb -like building constructed by the Sphinx Head Society is substantially unidentifiable as an independently existing structure. 8. That prior to August 14, 1989, respondents herein caused to be published a notice of public hearing concerning the proposed designation of 131 residential premises within the City of Ithaca, New York, as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District"; a copy of the aforesaid notice is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "A". HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 9. That petitioners, by their attorneys, thereafter appeared before respondent The Landmarks Preservation Commis sion on August 14, 1989, to protest the inclusion of their property in the proposed Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 10. That on or about August 14, 1989, the respondent Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commissionvoted to designate the 131 properties specified in the notice of public hearing as a "historic district" to be known as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 11. That the inclusion of petitioners' property in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic, District" was arbitrary, capricious and the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was not founded upon substantial evidence for the following reasons: (a) The inclusion of petitioners' property in an area designated an "historic district" does not fulfill the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. (b) The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission failed to make any findings of fact which would support the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area designated an "historic district". (c) The record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission does not contain expert opinion favor- able to the inclusion of. petitioners' property in the area HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 designated an "historic district", as required by Section 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Requirements for Inclusion in an "Historic District" 12. That an "historic district" is defined in Section 32.3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: "Historic District" shall mean an area which contains improvements which a. Have special character or special historical or aesthetical interest or value; and b. Represent one or more periods or styles of archi- tecture typical of one or more eras of the history of the City; and c. Cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City. 13. That petitioners believe that inclusion within an "historic district" in order to justify their property must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 14. That inasmuch as petitioners' residence was constructed within the last 10 years, petitioners' residence has no special historical interest or value. 15. That petitioners' residence has no special aesthetical interest or value insofar as is known to petitioners. 16. That the remains of the tomb -like masonry structure constructed by the Sphinx Head Society which has been incor- porated into petitioners' residence was so altered and changed in appearance by petitioners' predecessor in title that any 4 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 special historical or aesthetical interest which it may have had has been obliterated. 17. That petitioners' residence is entirely dissimilar to any of the_130 other properties included by respondents in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and does not represent any period or style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca. 18. That the remains of the Sphinx Head building, to the extent that it is visible, does not represent any style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca, and is in fact entirely atypical of any other structure contained within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 19. That the area designated by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", with or without the inclusion of petitioners' property, does not constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City by, reason of the existence of structures having special historical or aesthetical interest representative of one or more periods or styles of architecture or typical of one or more eras in the history of the City of Ithaca. 20. That petitioners respectfully submit that based upon. the criteria set forth in Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca there is no rational reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and the designation of petitioners' property as a part of such district by the respondent Ithaca 5 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 Landmarks Preservation Commission was therefore arbitrary and capricious. Failure to Make Findings of Fact 21. That Section 32.5 (D) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code requires that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission "shall keep a record which shall be open to the public view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions". 22. That to the best. of petitioners' knowledge and belief, the only record of the proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission on August 14, 1989, consists of a memorandum, with attachments, a copy of which is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B". 23. That the aforesaid memorandum contains no finding of fact setting forth the reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 24. That absent proper findings of fact by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, as required by Section 32.5 (D) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the actions of that municipal board may not be properly reviewed by this Court. 25. That the aforesaid memorandum, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", contains the statement that "the Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for a local designation on findings of historic and 6 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated State Historic Preservation Office), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman"; the aforesaid findings are annexed to the memorandum set forth herein as Exhibit "B"". 26. That the findings of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation do not mention petitioners' property and none of the areas of significance discussed in those findings would appear to pertain to petitioners' property. 27. That in the absence of findings of fact justifying the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" the inclusion of petitioners' property within such district by the Ithaca Landmarks Preser- vation Commission was arbitrary and capricious. Lack of Expert Opinion Favorable to Inclusion of Petitioners' Property in the Historic District 28. That Section 32.6 (B) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code provides as follows: no event shall a landmark or district be designated until the Commission has conducted a public hearing thereon. In the event that architectural style is a basis for such designation, the Commission shall not proceed to designate any landmark or district until the record il- lustrates the existence .of expert opinion favorable to such a designation. 7 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. 0. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 29. That as indicated by the notice of public hearing (Exhibit "A" annexed hereto), "architecture" was the chief area of significance cited by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission for its proposed designation of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 30. That the record of proceedings of the meeting of August 14, 1989, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", sets forth no "expert opinion" favorable to the designation of petitioners' property as a part of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 31. That the memorandum of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (Exhibit "B" annexed hereto) contains the following statement: Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifi- cations define. the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. 32. That the "consultant" mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum is not identified. 33. That the expert qualifications of the consultant mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum are not set forth in the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation 8 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Commission. That upon information and belief, the "consultant" employed by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation who compiled the survey of the properties located within the proposed "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was not qualified in the field of architecture within the definition of 36 CFR Section 61.4 (d)(1). 34. That petitioners believe that in order to support a finding that the architectural style of their property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must demonstrate the existence of expert opinion in the field of architecture favorable to such a designation. 35. That the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that the architectural style of petitioners' property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" is therefore not founded upon substantial evidence. 36. That no prior application has been made to any court for the relief requested herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners demand judgment reversing and annulling the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission dated August 14, 1989, which included petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", on the basis that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and not founded upon 9 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMI3ERG, ORaKIN & BENNe'rr ATTCRNCY5 ANC COUNSELORS AT LAW ZOO EAST BUFFALO =T. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6SDD IT),ACA. N"W veru; ;4AS substantial evidence, together. with SUCH ;Q r, turthe or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: August a1 , 1989 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200. E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 STATE OF CAI4.:(5RNIA COUNTY OF E0S vA 'BS : SS . CITY OF REnUENA • NO rN U l G' . , being duly sworn, deposes and says: That I am one o the Petitioners in the action herein; I have read the annexed Petition and know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters 1 believe em to be true. Sworn to before me this 21 lay of August, 1989. NO,—Y P BLIC Iii****** t***4:t*kip**** **,:i **1:*******mss OFFICIAL SEAL LUCINDA W. BAILEY NOTARY NOTARYPUBLIC—CALIFORNIA BOND FILED IN #..� LOS ANGELES COUNTY * My Commission Expires April 27, 1990 * **********Y.:*******************t**,),** *,),** 10 ALL STATE LEGAL SUPPLY CO. ONE COMMERCE DRIVE, CRANF0RD. NEW JERSEY 07016 (2) Exhibit A ED11 i• H u a...18/8. i19j9 11129 _FROM DRUYAHiSpBRN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776238 ITHACA LANDMARKS McSERVATION COMMII ,ON - CITY CR ITH{ACA 1 C3a BAST SEEN errmusT ITHACA, NtW YORK 1411Bo P.e2 T$LEPHONE; 277.1713 corm 80t LOCAL MIGRATION Local dasiination protects the , Local desllyesignifrotet city's Architectural) Landmarks Preservation Ordinaacties under the terms Architecturallyand/or I Lan orrknanc� empowers the (Chapter 32,the Ithaca Commission ion to p t ace Landmarks Preservation Co��i Comlacement approve or deny requests for addition or demolition, exterior aireratiic hearing. The process is triggered after a review and building orT demolition by the application rublie but di'ngcuze ix a designated from the buildingCommissioner. for • the structure historic esignated 1oc or Clocatedowith If al landmak located it plc a have been Approved by, no -permit can hove bof the Commi■■ion. 2• be issued until plans Che Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation use■ et1e- review criteria. Applicants in Rehabilitation as the the Commission can take appal. tosCowan Ct witdecisions of • Cowman Col2ecii. Overall the process serves tot . provide property owners with informed recommendations regarding design, materials, and technical pr appropriate to the rebablli-tetioa Of historicopropeta prevent hasty demroperties, demolition or inappropriate alterations to city's designated architectural And historic resources, ensure that new development Will pot depreciate the value • 4f significant structures and/or areas located nearby. As a final note, local designation has led to stabilisation neighborboode and improvements to buildin rf property value and sales potential. g stock and own increase' O—LC—designtn.lcl "An gloat OopWWnyr ampler.. won An 4dngyy,A &60.n 110yfnfn' K�.f �r-....y....,.. •..v-...rfw.... �..•Nfrwn...y-•rwr.:w...y �....� • EXHIBIT "A" A t1 G 88/2/lid& 11 3L FRDM pRUYA►i/5R8RN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 TorpioWaty on 1 Per od of $ gnif cancel Areas of.Significaaces Laval of significance; is 896-1937 Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Local P. 83 2renanAll The Cornell Heights Historic District is architecturally and a historically significant as an exceptional intact example of turn-.of-the-century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, etl;ict1y residential character (developed on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in. the period after World War X, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialised city. The pattern of development here., distinguished by an association with a single land company tbat employed the services of landscape architect .(Wi].liaa Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though tnotba unique, en was usualof in an era in which trolley lsuburbs along cities were being naso produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell Heights was promoted by its owners, as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion.. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all.built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century ardhitectst including 'William R. Willer. A further dimension of significancs sums from the intimate relationship between Cornell Heights and Cornell university. The impetus toward devQXopment of the subdivision vas closely linked to . Cornell CJniverslity' a major expansion around the turn-of--the- cantury, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and a1 arkced its growth into its present size and character. At its inception Cornell Heights was oonsiderad an "addition" or suburb of Cornell vnivereity itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Neighta and faculty members of national and international renown continue to make Cornell Heights their. home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic District illustrates: an important aspect of American planning and recalls a significant period in the history of Ithaca. 1 A 6E.88/i2� 1I 11213i. pRUyjlIVSRQRN 11 TYLER ' RD. TO 2776258 NOTICE OF PM/LIC t1AP 1Q Ox TSR LOCAL DESIGNATION 07 TUE CORBILL EXTORTS :IISTORxc D/STRICT P.84 Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Section 31.6A of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Cods, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, a Public Hearing will be held on August 14, 1989 at 7.00 p.m. in Common Council Chambers. 3rd floor, City Nall, 108 East Green Street, to hoar testimony concerning the designation of the Cornell Heights historic District. The Eottowiag properties are included in .the proposed historic district: Barton plea* - 109 Brook Lana .• 104 Dearborn Place - 109, 116, 202, 208, 213, 215, 216 Edgeciiff Piece. - 1, 101, 112 Fall Creak Drive - 202, 209-11, 212, 216, 218, 220, 225, 302, 310, 316, 326 Heights Court - 110-12, 111-13, 114. 115. 116-16 1/2. 118, 119, 120, 121, 123, 125 203 highland Avenue 106, 110, 150, 200, 201, Kelvin 'lace - 111, 114, 115, 116, 121, 125, 126, 207, 210, 212 Ladgaway - 1, 5, 6-6 1/2, 8, 10 Needham Place - 103 'Ridgewood Road - 2, 40. 55, 100, 115 Roberts Flee. - 122, 123, 124 Stewstt Avenue - 900, 916, 934, 1022, 1024 Th• Knoll - 102, 106, 111, 115, 115-1/2, 119 Thurston Avenue 101, 117, 119, 121, 140, 201, 205, 210, 214, 223, 305, 312, 315, 401, 410, 411, 504, 508. 520-21, 534, 536 Triphammer Road - 102, 109, 110, 117, 118, 124, 150 Wait Avenue - 118, 120, 122, 208, 209, 214, 216, 218, 222, 228, 230, 302., 307, 308. 313, 319 Westbourne Lane - 105, 110, 116, 126 425, Wyckoff Avenue - 201 1/2, 203, 205. 301, 303-03, 403. 419, 435 All interested parties v111 be given an opportunity to speak for or against designation at the hearing or may present written statements before the hearing to the Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, 108 Zest Green Street, Ithaca. NY 14850. Leslie A. Chatterton Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission 0-LAC-Oornell.hgt 0 •4 r : A ALL STATE LEGAL SUPPLY CO. ONE COMMERCE DRIVE, CRANFORD, NEW JERSEY 07018 (2) Exhibit B ED11 CITY OF ITHACA 10© EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 141350 ITHACA LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION Local Designation Cornell Heights TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 At the regular monthly meeting held on August 14, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determined by unanimous vote that those portions of the proposed Cornell Heights National Register District located within the city limits meet criteria for local designation as stipulated in Section 32.3(3) of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. By this action, the Commission recommends to the Common Council local historic district designation. See appendix Items 1 and 2 for a map and address list of the 131 affected properties. The Commission's vote followed a public hearing at which eleven property owners and rep-resentatives spoke in favor of designation and six property owners and representatives spoke against designation. In addition the Commission Chairperson read written comments in favor of local designation from three property owners and written comments against local designation from three property owners. Prior to the vote recommending local designation, the Commission, as lead agency for the environmental review in accordance with Section 32.6 1 of Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, determined by unanimous vote that the designation will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. This action constitutes a negative declaration and terminates the environmental review. The Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated state historic preservation office SHPO), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman. These findings, as prepared by the SHPO and presented to the Committee on the Registers at the hearing held in Albany on June 24, 1989 are item 3 of the appendix. EXHIBIT "B" Local Designation Cornell Heights -2- Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SIIPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifications define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. The Commission plans to forward its recommendation for local designation to the Common Council for consideration at the meeting to be held on September 6, 1989. This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 36.6c of the Ithaca Landmark6 Preservation Ordinance, wherein it is stated that the Commission "shall file a copy of the designation with the Planning Board and with Common Council". August 21, 1989 O-LC-LocalDes.CHt Appendix Item 1 Cornell Heights Local historic District Map it I Appendix Item 2 Cornell heights Local Historic District Property List 1. 109 Barton Place 2. 104 Brook Land 3. 109 Dearborn Place 4. 116 Dearborn Place 5. 202 Dearborn Place 6. 208 Dearborn Place 7. 213 Dearborn Place 8. 215 Dearborn Place 9. 216 Dearborn Place 10. 1 Edgecliff Place 11. 101 Edgecliff Place 12. 112 Edgecliff Place 13. 202 Fall Creek Drive 14. 209-11 Fall Creek Drive 15. 212 Fall Creek Drive 16. 216 Fall Creek Drive 17. 218 Fall Creek Drive 18. 220 Fall Creek Drive 19. 225 Fall Creek Drive 20. 302 Fall Creek Drive 21. 310 Fall Creek Drive 22. 316 Fall Creek Drive 23. 326 Fall Creek Drive 24. 110-12 Heights Court 25. 111-13 Heights Court 26. 114 heights Court 27. 115 heights Court 28. 116-16} Heights Court 29. 118 Heights Court 30. 119 Heights Court 31. 120 Heights Court 32. 121 Heights Court 33. 123 heights Court 34. 125 heights Court 35. 106 Highland Avenue 36. 110 Highland Avenue 37. 150 highland Avenue 38. 200 Highland Avenue 39. 201 highland Avenue 40. 203 Highland Avenue 41. 111 Kelvin Place 42. 114 Kelvin Place 43. 115 Kelvin Place 116 Kelvin Place 45. 121 Kelvin Place 46. 125 Kelvin Place 47. 126 Kelvin Place 48. 210 Kelvin Place 44. 49. 212 Kelvin Place 50. 1 Lodgeway 51. 5 Lodgeway 52. 6-6i Lodgeway 53. 8 Lodgeway 54. 10 Lodgeway 55. 105 Needham Place 56. 2 Ridgewood Road 57. 40 Ridgewood Road 58. 55 Ridgewood Road 59. 100 Ridgewood Road 60. 115 Ridgewood Road 61. 122 Roberts Place 62. 123 Roberts Place 63. 124 Roberts Place. 64. 900 Stewart Avenue 65. 916 Stewart Avenue 66. 934 Stewart Avenue 67. 1022 Stewart Avenue 68. 1024 Stewart Avenue 69. 102 The Knoll 70. 106 The Knoll 71. 111 The Knoll 72. 115 The Knoll 73. 115} The Knoll 74. 119 The Knoll 75. 101 Thurston Avenue 76. 117 Thurston Avenue 77. 119 Thurston Avenue 78. 121 Thurston Avenue 79. 140 Thurston Avenue 80. 201 Thurston Avenue 81. 205 Thurston Avenue 82. 210 Thurston Avenue 83. 214 Thurston Avenue 84. 223 Thurston Avenue 85. 305 Thurston Avenue 86. 312 Thurston Avenue 87. 315 Thurston Avenue 88. 401 Thurston Avenue 89. 410 Thurston Avenue 90. 411 Thurston Avenue 91. 504 Thurston Avenue 92. 508 Thurston Avenue 93. 520-22 Thurston Avenue 94. 534 Thurston Avenue 95. 536 Thurston Avenue 96 102 Triphammer Road Appendix Item 2 Cornell Heights local Historic District Property 97. 109 Triphammer Road 98. 110 Triphammer Road 99. 117 Triphammer Road 100. 118 Triphammer Road 101. 124 Triphammer Road 102. 150 Triphammer Road 103. 118 Wait Avenue 104. 120 Wait Avenue 105. 122 Wait Avenue 106. 208 Wait Avenue 107. 209 Wait Avenue 108. 214 Wait Avenue 109. 216 Wait Avenue 110. 218 Wait Avenue 111. 222 Wait Avenue 112. 228 Wait Avenue 113. 230 Wait Avenue 114. 302 Wait Avenue 115. 307 Wait Avenue 116. 308 Wait Avenue 117. 313 Wait Avenue 118. 319 Wait Avenue 119. 105 Westbourne Lane 120. 110 Westbourne Lane 121. 116 Westbourne Lane 122. 126 Westbourne Lane 123. 2011 Wyckoff Avenue 124. 203 Wyckoff Avenue 125. 205 Wyckoff Avenue 126. 301 Wyckoff Avenue 127. 303-05 Wyckoff Avenue 128. 403 Wyckoff Avenue 129. 419 Wyckoff Avenue 130. 425 Wyckoff Avenue 131. 435 Wyckoff Avenue Appendix Item 3 Cornell 'Heights Local Designation historic and Architectural Significance '1'oml)k i »:; c.ounty- Cornell.11eights Historic District, Ithaca Period of Significance: 1898-1937 Areas of Significance: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Level of Significance: Local Proposal: The Cornell Heights Historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (devel'oped on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in the period after World War I, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique, was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs along the barren fringes of large cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell Heights was promoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects, including William H.. Miller. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell heights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to Cornell University's major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception, Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell heights and faculty members of national and international renown continue to make Cornell heights their hone today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic District illustrates an important a pest of American planning and recalls a significant po i od in the h i:;tory of Ithaca .• 4 .r u STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: I, the undersigned, am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, and ❑ certify that the annexed • Attorney's has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy thereof. Certification • ❑ say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for . I have read the annexed a Attorney's Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be by alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein Affirmation not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: • The reason I make this affirmation instead of is I affirm that the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury. Dated: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am (Print signer's tame below signature) ❑ in the action herein; I have read the annexed Individual know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be verification alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. ❑ the of Corporate a corporation, one of the parties to the action; I have read the annexed Verifica`1o6 know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: age and reside at being sworn says: I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of On , 19 , I served a true copy of the annexed in the following manner: A ❑ by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post -office or official depository of the U.S. vice ByMailPostal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressee(s) as indicated below: y ❑ by delivering the same personally to the persons and at the addresses indicated below: Personal Service Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) Sir: Take notice of an of which the within is a copy, duly granted in the within entitled action, on the day of , 19 , and duly entered in the office of the Clerk of the County of on the day of 19 Dated , N.Y., 19 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 To Attorney for i Lamas Jo acn;uu2Is sign `auc a.Jolaq 01 Looms 2 0 :. 0 W 9 m 0 g. a s 0 0 CD 0 " 0 n:❑❑❑❑❑ `; CD ^b' 55 5 • X 0. o OR 0 a X 1C _.5•-. CD p' 0 G' C3. ',:r 0 p �° 0D ❑❑❑❑❑ ro(0 5, totP55 o . N 0 0 W 0 x o. 'r 5 w' p'. w = m 9 ,• ti. o• 0 -moi 0 0 ¢ ,p. 0 w_ w t7, 0, , a 0 aL, a. 00 0 ", oa0 w cr : rzr 0CM— 0000❑ 0 01 cn cn <,aoo co : a. e5ofciC 00000 ,...., 0 °'roc '+ No 0 b.. J CA Co .1 CD CD C O .. CD r r 0- C r • 0 0 0 n 0 b 0 0 0 0 0 0 personally. Deponent knew the deponent served the within P z 0 being duly sworn, deposes CL tt1 0 O n 0 0 CL 0 0 0 0 0 rt is not a party to the action, is over 18 years of age and resides at AFFIDAVIT OF PERSONAL SERVICE INDEX NO. YEAR 19 STATE OF NEW YORK guoro7An COURT County of Tompkins CARL SAGAN and ANIS URUkAN, Fetid. dCara SUZANNE i ICti'i'E.NSTEIN, ET AL., respondents Copy TTGTIIGE. OF PETITION AND PE2ITIOP_i HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for - Pati. tianar8 Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 Due and personal service of the within is admitted this day of 19 Attorney for Lamas Jo acn;uu2Is sign `auc a.Jolaq 01 Looms 2 0 :. 0 W 9 m 0 g. a s 0 0 CD 0 " 0 n:❑❑❑❑❑ `; CD ^b' 55 5 • X 0. o OR 0 a X 1C _.5•-. CD p' 0 G' C3. ',:r 0 p �° 0D ❑❑❑❑❑ ro(0 5, totP55 o . N 0 0 W 0 x o. 'r 5 w' p'. w = m 9 ,• ti. o• 0 -moi 0 0 ¢ ,p. 0 w_ w t7, 0, , a 0 aL, a. 00 0 ", oa0 w cr : rzr 0CM— 0000❑ 0 01 cn cn <,aoo co : a. e5ofciC 00000 ,...., 0 °'roc '+ No 0 b.. J CA Co .1 CD CD C O .. CD r r 0- C r • 0 0 0 n 0 b 0 0 0 0 0 0 personally. Deponent knew the deponent served the within P z 0 being duly sworn, deposes CL tt1 0 O n 0 0 CL 0 0 0 0 0 rt is not a party to the action, is over 18 years of age and resides at AFFIDAVIT OF PERSONAL SERVICE HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN c. BENNETT ATTORNEYS ANI) COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ;, I SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK I 46 1 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA,' MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents 9 SPI, a 6EL'iiu AUG 31 1989 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Ithaca, N. Y. 41 r.� NOTA OF PETITION ndex No. 294/6— RJI No . ash PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition of ANN DRUYAN and duly verified the 29th day of August, 1989, and upon all prior papers and proceedings herein and heretofore had, petitioners herein will apply to this Court at a Special Term thereof to be held at the Tompkins County Court House in the City of Ithaca, New York, on the 22nd day of Septembe 1989, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of said day or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for a judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules reversing and annulling the determination of respondent herein, The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, made the 14th day of August, 1989, which designated the premises owned by petitioners and known as 900 Stewart Avenue a part of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District upon the ground that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and was not supported by substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 Dated: August ,2q, 1989 2 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents PETITION Index No. RJI No. J. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTY OF TOMPKINS: The petition of Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan respectfully alleges and shows to this Court as follows: 1. That petitioners are individuals residing at 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York. 2. That respondents Suzanne Lichtenstein, Paul Testa, Martha Preston, Alex Skutt, Barclay C. Jones, Elizabeth Whicher and Nancy Meltzer constituted the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission at a meeting of such municipal board conducted on August 14, 1989. That the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission is a duly appointed municipal board created under the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca as authorized by Section 96-a of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. 3. That respondent The City of Ithaca, New York, is a HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14651 municipal corporation having general governmental responsibility for the City of Ithaca, New York. 4. That petitioners are owners of premises -known as 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, New York, which consists of a residential dwelling constructed between 1978 and 1981 on the north rim of Fall Creek Gorge. 5. That petitioners' premises were formerly owned by the Sphinx Head Society, a fraternal organization of Cornell University students which constructed a windowless tomb -like masonry structure upon the premises in the 1920's. 6. That petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, remodelled the structure originally built by the Sphinx Head Society and annexed to it the residential building which presently comprises petitioners' residence. 7. That following the remodelling work performed by petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, the windowless tomb -like building constructed by the Sphinx Head Society is substantially unidentifiable as an independently existing structure. 8. That prior to August 14, 1989, respondents herein caused to be published a notice of public hearing concerning the proposed designation of 131 residential premises within the City of Ithaca, New York, as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District"; a copy of the aforesaid notice is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "A". 2 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 9. That petitioners, by their .attorneys, thereafter appeared before respondent The Landmarks Preservation Commis- sion on August 14, 1989, to protest the inclusion of their property in the proposed Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 10. That on or about August 14, 1989, the respondent Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to designate the 131 properties specified in the notice of public hearing as a "historic district" to be known as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 11. That the inclusion .of petitioners' property in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was arbitrary, capricious and the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was not founded upon substantial evidence for the following reasons: (a) The inclusion of petitioners' property in an area designated an "historic district" does not fulfill the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. (b) The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission failed to make any findings of fact which would support the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area designated an "historic district". (c) The record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission does not contain expert opinion favor- able to the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area 3 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14351 designated an "historic district", as required by Section 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Requirements for Inclusion in an "Historic District" 12. That an "historic district" is defined in Section 32.3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: "Historic District" shall mean an area which contains improvements which a. Have special character or special historical or aesthetical interest or value; and b. Represent one or more periods or styles of archi- tecture typical of one or more eras of the history of the City; and c. Cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City. 13. That petitioners believe that in order to justify inclusion within an "historic district" their property must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 14. That inasmuch as petitioners' residence was constructed within the last 10 years, petitioners' residence has no special historical interest or value. 15. That petitioners' residence has no special aesthetical interest or value insofar as is known to petitioners. 16. That the remains of the tomb -like masonry structure constructed by the Sphinx Head Society which has been incor- porated into petitioners' residence was so altered and changed in appearance by petitioners' predecessor in title that any 4 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 special historical or aesthetical interest which it may have had has been obliterated. 17. That petitioners' residence is entirely dissimilar to any of the 130 other properties included by respondents in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and does not represent any period or style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca. 18. That the remains of the Sphinx Head building, to the extent that it is visible, does not represent any style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca, and is in fact entirely atypical of any other structure contained within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 19. That the area designated by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", with or without the inclusion of petitioners' property, does not constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City by reason of the existence of structures having special historical or aesthetical interestrepresentative of one or more periods or styles of architecture or typical of one or more eras in the history of the City of Ithaca. 20. That petitioners respectfully submit that based upon the criteria set forth in Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca there is no rational reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and the designation of petitioners' property as a part of such district by the respondent Ithaca 5 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14651 Landmarks Preservation Commission was therefore arbitrary and capricious. Failure to Make Findings of Fact 21. That Section 32.5 (D) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code requires that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission "shall keep a record which shall be open to the public view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions". 22. That to the best. of petitioners' knowledge and belief, the only 'record of the proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission on August 14, 1989, consists of a memorandum, with attachments, a copy of which is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B". 23. That the aforesaid memorandum contains no finding of fact setting forth the reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 24. That absent Landmarks Preservation proper findings of fact by the Ithaca Commission, as required by Section 32.5 (D) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the actions of that municipal board may not be properly reviewed by this Court. 25. That the aforesaid memorandum, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", contains the statement that "the Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for a local designation on findings of historic and 6 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated State Historic Preservation Office), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman"; the aforesaid findings are annexed to the memorandum set forth herein as Exhibit "B"". 26. That the findings of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation do not mention petitioners' property and none of the areas of significance discussed in those findings would appear to pertain to petitioners' property. 27. That in the absence of findings of fact justifying the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" the inclusion of petitioners' property within such district by the Ithaca Landmarks Preser- vation Commission was arbitrary and capricious. Lack of Expert Opinion Favorable to Inclusion of Petitioners' Property in the Historic District 28. That Section 32.6 (B) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code provides as follows: In no event shall a landmark or district be designated until the Commission has conducted a public hearing thereon. In the event that architectural style is a basis for such designation, the Commission shall not proceed to designate any landmark or district until the record il- lustrates the existence of expert opinion favorable to such a designation. 7 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO S'1 . SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 1485 29. That as indicated by the notice of public hearing (Exhibit "A" annexed hereto), "architecture" was the chief area of significance cited by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission for its proposed designation of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 30. That the record of proceedings of the meeting of August 14, 1989, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", sets forth no "expert opinion" favorable to the designation of petitioners' property as a part of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 31. That the memorandum of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (Exhibit "B" annexed hereto) contains the following statement: Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifi- cations define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and\ treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. 32. That the "consultant" mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum is not identified. 33. That the expert qualifications of the consultant mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum are not set forth in the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation 8 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Commission. That upon information and belief, the "consultant" employed by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation who compiled the survey of the properties located within the proposed "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was not qualified in the field of architecture within the definition of 36 CFR Section 61.4 (d)(1). 34. That petitioners believe that in order to support a finding that the architectural style of their property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must demonstrate the existence of expert opinion in the field of architecture favorable to such a designation. 35. That the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that the architectural style of petitioners' property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" is therefore not founded upon substantial evidence. 36. That no prior application has been made to any court for the relief requested herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners demand judgment reversing and annulling the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission dated August 14, 1989, which included petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", on the basis that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and not founded upon 9 HOLMSERG. GALL AC �'}-i HOLMBERG. ORKIN E. HENNirf T ATTGMNIZV 5 ANC [Ql!!1SEZ ORS AT LAW 2,7: EAST BUFFAL!7 ST. SJrTE 572 P. Q. BOX 6540 I�1•A'A, PJ'_W V!Ir<): 741;.: substantial evidence, together with Stlik 01W, different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: August a /, 1989 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200. E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF Los! YA GFL S : SS . CITY 'OFAA ADENA t1r C f -OR l aPf , being duly sworn, deposes and says: That I am one of the Petitioners in the action herein; I have read the annexed Petition and know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters I believe _em to be true. Sworn to before me this 1r4.,; ay of August, 1989. l-GC'(4t NOY PUBLIC mt.44.04,..**.*S******fWba,,..vt**Y4,d. I. o6'zLc1M.St:tL * #�. ,t, L CINDA W.BAILEY * * , �'p. ),3 FJOfARY PLI1L -CALIF OItlIA k. •r -" J, NOTARY uordD FILED IN * �� -� • LOS AP:O :L F`; CCOUNTY* * My Con r ;Sion Expires April 2?, 1990 4. ***********4 *********,************4,* 10 r M a.. '-.• ITHACA LANOMAgKe McSERVAT1oN COMMIe6ION fKUM DRUYRH/SRBRN 1! TYLER RD. TO 2776258 CITY OF ITHACA 1089 eau,. GIRCEN 87PIfIiT ITHACA. NEW YORK 14RE:Q P.e2 rrLEPHONE: 312.1713 core 107 LOCAL DESIGNATION Local designation protects the city's architectural) historically aignificaat y and/or Landmarks preservation Ordinance, under the terms of the Ithaca The or inane. em ower (Chapter 32, sMunicipalervation Co��r Commi•sion to approve p s the t ace Landmarks Preservation roplacemynt or deny requests for exterior alteration. hearing. The process or demolition, after a review and building or demolition is triggered bypublic permit from thet)uildingeatii for a the structure is ■ designated los the designated al landmark O Commissioner. wit If g ted historic district, no permit°r sued un within a have been approved by the p can be Issued have bee ofCommission. T until plans Che Interior's Standards fore Rehabilitationission eastth review criteria. Applicants in the Commission cansagreemeent wit the take appeals to tl dentitions of Coamon Council. Overall the process serves toe • provide property owners with informed recommendations regarding design, materials, and technical appropriate to the rehabilitation Prs Of historicc groperoperxies, prevent hasty demolition or inappropriate alterations to city's designated architecture]. and historic resources, • ensure that new development will not depreciate the value of significant structures and/or areas located nearby. As a final note, local designation has lad to stabilisation of neighborhoods and improvements to building stock and Can increase Property value and sales potential. O—LC—dssigntn.lcl ..An pow oncwwnv, IMMOir WWI eo AM/ TWA . .. ... �.ver..: .. ..... mMh. A.Ya�N1oy1.n\• a �.. M1111. -.....J....... w.. V ...11 EXHIBIT "A" A 88� 2�1 ! 1 �3� FROM pituyiwsAanN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 � �� o,1 •• , , - is _ . Per od of S gnif canoe: 898-1937 - Areas of . Significances Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Communi anning Level of Significances Local P. 83 i Th Cornell The Cornell Heights Historic District is architecturally an d historically significant as an exceptional intact n dexa plc of f a turn -.of -the -century planned rest dentil planed in an outstanding natural setting alo_ongthe northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlookinghtheicie tyct gIgt�hacalandat he 'street southern tip of Cgyu9 plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, etxtctly residential character (.devaibped on largie private lots) and its 3 htradition of the of "ideal" residencment eace park developedt within ihe nthe ronantiv tradition of the p ulalriced second half of the nineteenth centuryand P p by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest =Quantum in theeriod after World War X, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, that distinguished by an association 'with a single land company employed tea garvioes of landscape architect (yilliam Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs along the barren fringes of large cit.iee were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans, by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell Heights wns promoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were. erected hers between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs -and several represent'the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects 3.nclu‘ding William H. Killer. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell Heights and Cornell university. The islpetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to . Cornell University's major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of corneal University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Heighta and faculty 1.xenbere of national and international renown continue to Make Cornell Heights their home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic District illustrates an important aspect of American planning and recalls a significant period in the history of Ithaca. A J ...!"",2.1In 11 ,3L s_ FR 0..K pRUyjitie5R RN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 DOTICE OP ?IIYLIC ZIA1t1<IG ox tax LOCAL DE8I011ATIOx 07 Tilt CORSZLL H11GST$ hISTORIC Instinct P. 84 Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Section 31.6A of Chapter 92 of the Municipal Cods, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, a Public Hearing will be held on August 14, 1989 et 7100 p.m. in Common Council Chambers, 3rd floor, City Ball, 108 Zest Crean Street, to hear testimony Concerning the designation of the Cornell Heights historic District. Ths following properties are included in the proposed historic districts Barton P1ece - 109 Brook Lane - 104 Dearborn Place - 109, 116, 202, 208, 213, 215, 216 Edgecliff ?lett. 1, 101, 112 Tall Creek Drive - 202, 209-11, 212, 310, 316, 326 Heights Court - 110-12, 211-13, 1.14, 115. 116-16 1/2. 119, 120, 121, 123, 125 Highland avenue - 106, 110. 150, 200, 201, 203 Kelvin Place - 111, 114, 115, 116, 121, 125, 126, Lodgeway - 1, 5, 6-6 1/2, 8, 10 Needham Place -- 105 Ridgewood Road - 2, 40, 55, 100, 115 Roberts PlaC. -- 122, 123, 124 Stewart Avenue - 900, 916, 934, 1022, 1024 The Knoll - 102, 106, 111, 113, 115 1/2, 119 Thurston Avenue .. 101. 117, 119, 121, 140, 201, 203, 223, 305. 312, 315, 401, 410, 411, 520-22, 534, 336 Triphammer Road - 102, 109, 110, 117, 118, 124, 150 Wait Avenue - 118, 120, 122, 208, 209, 214, 216, 218, 230, 302, 307, 308, 313, 319 Westbourne Lane - 105, 110, 116, 126 Vyckoff Avenue - 201 1/2, 203, 203. 301. 303-05, 403. 435 216, 218, 220, 225, 302, 1111, 207, 210, 212 210, 214, 504, 508. 222, 228, 419, 425. All interested parties will be given an opportunity to speak for or against designation at the hearing or may present written statements before the hearing to the Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks preservation Commission, 108 Last Crean Street, Ithaca. 1!Y 14850. Leslie A. Chatterton Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission 0-L4C-Oornell.Hgt CITY OF ITHACA 109 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 In1ACA LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION Local Designation Cornell Heights TELEPHONE: 272-17 t3 CODE 607 At the regular monthly meeting held on August 14, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determined by unanimous vote that those portions of the proposed Cornell Heights National Register District located within the city limits meet criteria for local designation as stipulated in Section 32.3(3) of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. By this action, the Commission recommends to the Common Council local historic district designation. See appendix Items 1 and 2 for a map and address list of the 131 affected properties. The Commission's vote followed a public hearing at which eleven property owners and representatives spoke in favor of designation and six property owners and representatives spoke against designation. In addition the Commission Chairperson read written comments in favor of local designation from three property owners and written comments against local designation from three property owners. Prior to the vote recommending local designation, the Commission, as lead agency for the environmental review in accordance with Section 32.6 1 of Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, determined by unanimous vote that the designation will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. This action constitutes a negative declaration and terminates the environmental review. The Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated state historic preservation office SHPO), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman. These findings, as prepared by the SHPO and presented to the Comrnittefe on the Registers at the hearing held in .Albany on June 24, 1989 are item 3 of the appendix. EXHIBIT "B" Local Designation -2- Cornell Heights Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifications define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. The Commission plans to forward its recommendation for local designation to the Common Council for consideration at the meeting to be held on September 6, 1989. This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 36.6c of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, wherein it is stated that the Commission "shall file a copy of the designation with the Planning Board and with Common Council". August 21, 1989 O-LC-LocalDes.CHt Appendix Item 1 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Map 4 Ii Appendix Item 2 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Property List 1. 109 2. 104 3. 109 4. 116 5. 202 208 213 215 216 1 101 112 202 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. Barton Place Brook Land Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Dearborn Place Edgecliff Place Edgecliff Place Edgecliff Place Fall Creek Drive 209-11 Fall Creek 212 216 218 220 225 302 310 316 326 110-12 111-13 Fall Creek Fall Creek Fall Creek Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Fall Creek Creek Creek Creek Creek Creek Heights Heights Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Drive Court Court 114 Heights Court 115 lleights Court 116-161 Heights Court 118 119 120 121 123 125 106 110 150 200 201 203 111 114 115 116 121 125 126 210 Heights Court Heights Court Heights Court Heights Court Heights Court Heights Court Highland Avenue Highland Avenue Highland Avenue Highland Avenue Ilighland Avenue Highland Avenue Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Kelvin Place Place Place Place Place Place Place Place 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96 212 Kelvin Place 1 Lodgeway 5 Lodgeway 6-6i Lodgeway 8 10 105 2 40 55 100 115 122 123 124 900 916 934 1022 1024 102 106 111 115 Lodgeway Lodgeway Needham Place Ridgewood Road Ridgewood Road Ridgewood Road Ridgewood Road Ridgewood Road Roberts Place Roberts Place Roberts Place. Stewart Stewart Stewart Stewart .Stewart Avenue Avenue Avenue Avenue Avenue The Knoll The Knoll The Knoll The Knoll 1151 The Knoll 119 The Knoll 101 Thurston Avenue 117 Thurston Avenue 119 Thurston Avenue 121 Thurston Avenue 140 Thurston Avenue 201 Thurston Avenue 205 Thurston Avenue 210 Thurston Avenue 214 Thurston Avenue 223 Thurston Avenue 305 Thurston Avenue 312 Thurston Avenue 315 Thurston Avenue 401 Thurston Avenue 410 Thurston Avenue 411 Thurston Avenue 504 Thurston Avenue 508 Thurston Avenue 520-22 Thurston Avenue 534 Thurston Avenue 536 Thurston Avenue 102 Triphammer Road Appendix Item 2 Cornell Heights local Historic District Property 97. 109 Triphammer Road 98. 110 Triphammer Road 99. 117 Triphammer Road 100. 118 'triphammer Road 101. 124 Triphammer Road 102. 150 Triphammer Road 103. 118 Wait Avenue 104. 120 Wait Avenue 105. 122 Wait Avenue 106. 208 Wait Avenue 107. 209 Wait Avenue 108. 214 Wait Avenue 109. 216 Wait Avenue 110. 218 Wait Avenue 111. 222 Wait Avenue 112. 228 Wait Avenue 113. 230 Wait Avenue 114. 302 Wait Avenue 115. 307 Wait Avenue 116. 308 Wait Avenue 117. 313 Wait Avenue 118. 319 Wait Avenue 119. 105 Westbourne Lane 120. 110 Westbourne Lane 121. 116 Westbourne Lane 122. 126 Westbourne Lane 123. 2011 Wyckoff Avenue 124. 203 Wyckoff Avenue 125. 205 Wyckoff Avenue 126. 301 Wyckoff Avenue 127. 303-05 Wyckoff Avenue 128. 403 Wyckoff Avenue 129. 419 Wyckoff Avenue 130. 425 Wyckoff Avenue 131. 435 Wyckoff Avenue Appendix Item 3 Cornell 'Heights Local Designation Historic and Architectural Significance Cornell Heights historic District, Ithaca Period of Significance: 1898-1937 Area; of Significance: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Level of Significance: Local Proposal: The Cornell Ileights Historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (developed on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in the period after World War I, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique, was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs along the barren fringes of large cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell Ileights was promoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the. work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects, including William H. Miller. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell Heights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to Cornell University's major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception, Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century ot` the university resided in Cornell Heights and faculty member!; of national and international renown continue to snake Cornell l Haight:s their home today. Retaining a high level of i nt.eq i ty, the Cornell. Heights Historic District: illustrates an i mpoa t:.ant: ;n;pect of American planning and recalls ;a :.icjni f ic_;ant: poi incl its the hi:;tory of Ithaca_ STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: I, the undersigned, am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, and ❑ certify that the annexed Attorney'. has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy thereof. A Certification 0 say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for Attorney's . I have read the annexed Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be by alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein effirmati°° not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Chock Applicable Bo The reason I make this affirmation instead of is I affirm that the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury. - Dated: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am (Print signer's name below signature) ❑ in the action herein; I have read the annexed Individual (mow the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be Verification alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. the of Corporate a corporation, one of the parties to the action; I have read the annexed Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside at On , 19 , I served a true copy of the annexed in the following manner: p ❑ by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post -office or official depository of the U.S. Service Postal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressee(s) as indicated below: By Mail r ❑ by delivering the same personally to the persons and at the addresses indicated below: Personal Service Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) Sir: Take notice of an of which the within is a copy, duly granted in the within entitled action, on the day of , 19 , and duly entered in the office of the Clerk of the County of on the day of 19 Dated , N.Y., 19 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 To Attorney for ansas Jo a ml-eu2Ts • 0 ° sp.{; `out a.ioJaq o; 0 `; 7 0CD w o 7E cl/ 0 co 0 -1 c:❑OO❑❑ •`; <�ox._ 0 xo F ;„0 ° ° co x- 0 �: P 0 0 0 CD FP 0000❑ co 2 01 gl o °' o �•a'.E xw 5 0 , co n. =° ❑ ❑ a a w w V a 45 � F. 0 0 o 0 00 w 0' --' M. 0 =. acra fn w 0000❑ - o O rn ; A 0 < o oo CD co CD ^+ cncno £ 0 0 ❑❑❑❑❑ 0u1cnu!C < 0r- 0 : : a � QJ Ca Ca 0000❑ t7 05,.....0 co °1C roo' 0000.. 0 pc- -- E4 r. 0 0 d0 0 F cco deponent served the within CD oc 7 0 0 0 0 0 ' w °� o. w 0' a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 w 'ts o ° 0 r• o' 0 co 0 CD 0 0 0 CL c0D 0 INDEX NO. TEAR 19 STATE OF NEW YORK 2112"}3'.9x_ COURT County of Tompkins CARL SAGAN and ANN D[U A1i , Petiti<31a:arC SUZANNE T.ICHTENSTEIN, ET AL., aespondents Copy NOTICi: OF PETITION AND PETIT/ON HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Pr1 i.i tionar8 Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 Due and personal service of the within is admitted this day of 19 Attorney for ansas Jo a ml-eu2Ts • 0 ° sp.{; `out a.ioJaq o; 0 `; 7 0CD w o 7E cl/ 0 co 0 -1 c:❑OO❑❑ •`; <�ox._ 0 xo F ;„0 ° ° co x- 0 �: P 0 0 0 CD FP 0000❑ co 2 01 gl o °' o �•a'.E xw 5 0 , co n. =° ❑ ❑ a a w w V a 45 � F. 0 0 o 0 00 w 0' --' M. 0 =. acra fn w 0000❑ - o O rn ; A 0 < o oo CD co CD ^+ cncno £ 0 0 ❑❑❑❑❑ 0u1cnu!C < 0r- 0 : : a � QJ Ca Ca 0000❑ t7 05,.....0 co °1C roo' 0000.. 0 pc- -- E4 r. 0 0 d0 0 F cco deponent served the within CD oc 7 0 0 0 0 0 ' w °� o. w 0' a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 w 'ts o ° 0 r• o' 0 co 0 CD 0 0 0 CL c0D 0 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN t. BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO _, I SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14841 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKI CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY-MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents AUG 91 1989 - ]i11 CITY CLERK; 5 6L Ithaca, R. Cu ,---\ , N7' CE OF PETITION Index No. n9 S/S RJI No . %- 02 :r J. /oS - PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition of ANN DRUYAN and duly verified the 29th day of August, 1989, and upon all prior papers and proceedings herein and heretofore had, petitioners herein will apply to this Court at a Special Term thereof to be held at the Tompkins County Court House in the City of Ithaca, New York, on the 22nd day of Septembe 1989, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of said day or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for a judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules reversing and annulling the determination of respondent herein, The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, made the 14th day of August, 1989, which designated the premises owned by petitioners and known as 900 Stewart Avenue a of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District upon the ground that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and was not supported by substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE SO2 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Dated: August aQ, 1989 2 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents PETITION Index No. RJI No. J. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTY OF TOMPKINS: The petition of Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan respectfully alleges and shows to this Court as follows: 1. That petitioners are individuals residing at 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York. 2. That respondents Suzanne Lichtenstein, Paul Testa, Martha Preston, Alex Skutt, Barclay C. Jones, Elizabeth Whicher and Nancy Meltzer constituted the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission at a meeting of such municipal board conducted on August 14, 1989. That the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission is a duly appointed municipal board created under the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca as authorized by Section 96-a of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. 3. That respondent The City of Ithaca, New York, is a 5 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 municipal corporation having general governmental responsibility for the City of Ithaca, New York. 4. That petitioners are owners of premises -known as 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, New York, which consists of a residential dwelling constructed between 1978 and 1981 on the north rim of Fall Creek Gorge. 5. That petitioners' premises were formerly owned by the Sphinx Head Society, a fraternal organization of Cornell University students which constructed a windowless tomb -like masonry structure upon the premises in the 1920's. 6. That petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, remodelled the structure originally built by the Sphinx Head Society and annexed to it the residential building which presently comprises petitioners' residence. 7. That following the remodelling work performed by. petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, the windowless tomb -like building constructed by the Sphinx Head Society is substantially unidentifiable as an independently existing structure. 8. That prior to August 14, 1989, respondents herein caused to be published a notice of public hearing concerning the proposed designation of 131 residential premises within the City of Ithaca, New York, as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District"; a copy of the aforesaid notice is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "A". 2 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 9. That petitioners, by their attorneys, thereafter appeared before respondent The Landmarks Preservation Commis- sion on August 14, 1989, to protest the inclusion of their property in the proposed Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 10. That on or about August 14, 1989, the respondent Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to designate the 131 properties specified in the notice of public hearing as a "historic district" to be known as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 11. That the inclusion of petitioners' property in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was arbitrary, capricious and the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was not founded upon substantial evidence for the following reasons: (a) The inclusion of petitioners' property in an area designated an "historic district" does not fulfill the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. (b) The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission failed to make any findings of fact which would support the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area designated an "historic district". (c) The record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission does not contain expert opinion favor- able to the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area 3 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 141151 designated an ,"historic district", as required by Section 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Requirements for Inclusion in an "Historic District" 12. That an "historic district" is defined in Section 32.3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: "Historic District" shall mean an area which contains improvements which a. Have special character or special historical or aesthetical interest or value; and b. Represent one or more periods or styles of archi- tecture typical of one or more eras of the history of the City; and c. Cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City. 13. That petitioners believe that inclusion within an "historic district" in order to justify their property must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 14. That inasmuch as petitioners' residence was constructed within the last 10 years, petitioners' residence has no special historical interest or value. 15. That petitioners' residence has no special aesthetical interest or value insofar as is known to petitioners. 16. That the remains of the tomb -like masonry structure constructed by the Sphinx Head Society which has been incor- porated into petitioners' residence was so altered and changed in appearance by petitioners' predecessor in title that any 4 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN G BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14551 special historical or aesthetical interest which it may have had has been obliterated. 17. That petitioners' residence is entirely dissimilar to any of the 130 other properties included by respondents in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and does not represent any period or style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca. 18. That the remains of the Sphinx Head building, to the extent that it is visible, does not represent any style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca, and is in fact entirely atypical of any other structure contained within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 19. That the area designated by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", with or without the inclusion of petitioners' property, does not constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City by reason of the existence of structures having special historical or aesthetical interest representative of one or more periods or styles of architecture or typical of one or more eras in the history of the City of Ithaca. 20. That petitioners respectfully submit that based upon the criteria set forth in Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca there is no rational reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and the designation of petitioners' property as a part of such district by the respondent Ithaca 5 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Landmarks Preservation Commission was therefore arbitrary and capricious. Failure to Make Findings of Fact 21. That Section 32.5 (D) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code requires that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission "shall keep a record which shall be open to the public view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions". 22. That to the best. of petitioners' knowledge and belief, the only record of the proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission on August 14, 1989, consists of a memorandum, with attachments, a copy of which is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B". 23. That the aforesaid memorandum contains no finding of fact setting forth the reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 24. That absent proper findings of fact by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, as required by Section 32.5 (D) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the actions of that municipal board may not be properly reviewed by this Court. 25. That the aforesaid memorandum, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", contains the statement that "the Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for a local designation on findings of historic and 6 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated State Historic Preservation Office), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman"; the aforesaid findings are annexed to the memorandum set forth herein as Exhibit "B"". 26. That the findings of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation do not mention petitioners' property and none of the areas of significance discussed in those findings would appearto pertain to petitioners' property. 27. That in the absence of findings of fact justifying the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" the inclusion of petitioners' property within such district by the Ithaca Landmarks Preser- vation Commission was arbitrary and capricious. Lack of Expert Opinion Favorable to Inclusion of Petitioners' Property in the Historic District 28. That Section 32.6 (B) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code provides as follows: In no event shall a landmark or district be designated until the Commission -has conducted a public hearing thereon. In the event that architectural style is a basis for such designation, the Commission shall not proceed to designate any landmark or district until the record il- lustrates the existence of expert opinion favorable to such a designation. 7 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN 6, BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT L.AW 200 EAST BUFFALO 51 SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 142351 29. That as indicated by the notice of public hearing (Exhibit "A" annexed hereto), "architecture" was the chief area of significance cited by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission for its proposed designation of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 30. That the record of proceedings of the meeting of August 14, 1989, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", sets forth no "expert opinion" favorable to the designation of petitioners' property as a part of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 31. That the memorandum of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (Exhibit the following statement: "B" annexed hereto) contains Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifi- cations define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. 32. That the "consultant" mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum is not identified. 33. That the expert qualifications of the consultant mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum are not set forth in the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation 8 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14651 Commission. That upon information and belief, the "consultant" employed by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation who compiled the survey of the properties located within the proposed "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was not qualified in the field of architecture within the definition of 36 CFR Section 61.4 (d)(1). 34. That petitioners believe that in order to support a finding that the architectural style of their property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must demonstrate the existence of expert opinion in the field of architecture favorable to such a designation. 35. That the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that the architectural style of petitioners' property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" is therefore not founded upon substantial evidence. 36. That no prior application has been made to any court for the relief requested herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners demand judgment reversing and annulling the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission dated August 14, 1989, which included petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", on the basis that such determination was arbitrary; capricious and not founded upon 9 HOLMBERG,. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORrtW F BENNETT ATTGINC V 5 ANO COUNSELORS AT LAW ZOO EAST BIJFFAL4 ST. SUITE 592. F'. O. BOX 6590 substantial evidence, together With SttC :9 '1J.r 04. further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: August a 4i, 1989 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200. E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 STATE OF CAL FORNIA . COUNTY OF zosNAvE3. S : SS. CITY OF .ASADEIr'A 21W )R u v6 Iv. being duly sworn, deposes and says: That I am one of the Petitioners in the action herein; I have read the annexed Petition and know the contents thereof and the sane are true to my knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters I believe em to be true. Sworn to before me this ?VA. ay of August, JJ1989. NO BLIc ' 1.14.,,,,,,,_...N,4OFFECIA[. SEM, . r�+ U:C1NDA W. BAILEY * • `'dor%{' tri NO1'RY ?1'1 *C --CAI IIC •UltA * • .•r,•1 NOTARY BOND F # _ ��. Uffil. L,�)IdU .ILf.0 IN * LOS ANGCTIF.S COUNTY Ar * My Commission Lxpires April 2?, 1990 4: ************ ********4************4 0; 10 ITHACA LANDMAgw. /nesEIIVAT1oN COMMJi6ION ..un uicuYRN/SAORN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 CITY C311 ITHACA 1 Ott GAST GIRCE V STAMM ITHACA, NSW YORK 142B0 P.02 rILEPkoHE; 272.1713 CODA 107 LOCAL DISIGitAtIOH Local designetion protects the city's architectural) yhistorically significant Landmarks Py sirnifica Ordinance,Q o and/or I P ties under the terms of the Ithaca The or inane* empowers the (Chapter 32, Preservation Cu) e Commission to approve P t ace Landmarks Preservation roplacemenc, aor deny request's for exterior alteration. hearing. Th:it or demolition, after a review and building T demolition processis triggered by tire application foruilia the 'structure ix • permit from the Building the geated local landmark or Commissioner. If designated historic district, no � located have been Approved b permit can be issued until a Secretar of the Interior's Standards fore Commehabi■sioa on%seem as ens review criteria. Applicants to gehabilitation as the the Commission can take appeals tOsagreement wit. deo COmmbn Council, isi°ns of Overall the proem serves Lei p rovide property owners with informed recommendations g g design, materials a duras appropriate to the rehabilitations of procedures of historic properties, prevent hasty demolition or inappropriate alterations to city's designated architectural and historic resources, ensure that new development will not depreciate the value of significant structures and/et areas located nearby. As a final note, local designation has lad to stabilization of neighborhood: and Improvements to building stock and can increase property value and sales potential. O-LC-dssigntn.lcl ....... "An [Mui Oovekm1y bnW1n or.. won An A11o.y.. A41...•fy ••• s.- .....+...•,.•w.. v .w1.w...._. ..HI t . ..y.. Iwr..w....r.• JVW.... ... EXHIBIT "A" Al) •G 08/61.2.1U2.,111‘31.. `FROM pRUtfitiisneRH 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 — OTS n l Per od of S gnif Cana: Areas of,Significances Level of significance; is 898-1937 Architecture,, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Local P.83 Er22(25.1.11 The Cornell Heights Historic District is architecturally an d historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting alonq the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlokinghtehedistrict'scity yzthaca and athe select southern tip of CayugaLake. plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (devel'bped on large private lots) and its i historical pattern Midealverepidencment alace it within developed a the reaantio tradition of the second half of the nineteenth century and popularised by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in the period after World War X, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a singe land company that employed the services of landaicape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not b unique, fringes avas usuofalrgeal in an era in which trolley suburbs along the cities vere being masa produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property camera. Cornell Heights was promoted by its owners as a high- class residential, suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Home8, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects i.nalu�ding William H. ]tiller. A further dimension of significance sts* frog the intiaats relationship between Cornell Heights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision vas closely linked to . Cornell Zniversiity'a major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tre*endaus effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception Cornell Heights was oonsidered an "addition" or suburb of corned University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Heights and faculty members of national and international renown continue to make Cornell Heights their home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic District illustrates an iMportant aspect of American planning and recalls a significant period in the history of Ithaca. • / A 7j u 88/832:1U1. 11 t. , FROM pRUy_OVER RN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 NOTICE 07 ?UILIC UJ L 10 ON THE LOCAL DESIGNATION 07 TUN COk ZLL 1112GUTS II5TORIC AxsTNICT Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Section 32.6A of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, s Public Hearing will be held on August 14, 1989 at 7100 p.m. in Common Council Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street, to hear testiiaony concerning the designation of the Cornell Heights Sistoric District. 'f11s following properties are included in the proposed historic distrieti Barton Y1aoe - 109 Brook Lana .• 104 Dearborn Placa - 109, 116, 202, 208, 213, Edged/ft Place. - 1, 101, 112 Tall Creek Drive - 202, 209-11, 212, 216, 310, 316, 326 Court - 110-832, 111-13, 1.14, 115. 116-16 1/2, 112, 119, 120, 121, 123, 125 Highland Avenue - 106, 110, 150, 200, 201, 203 Kelvin Placa - 111, 114, 115, 116, 121, 125, 126, Lodgeway - 1, 5, 6-6 1/2, 8, 10 Needham Place - 105 Ridgewood Road - 2, 40, 55, 100, 115 Roberts PIRG' -- 122, 123, 124 Stewart Avenue - 900, 916, 934, 1022, 1024 The Knoll - 102, 106, 111, 113, 115 1/2, 119 Thurston Avenue .. 101, 117, 119, 121, 140, 201, 205, 223, 305, 3832, 315, 401, 410, 411, 520-22, 534, 536 Triphammer Road - 102, 109, 110, 117, 118, 124, 150 Wait Avenue - 118, 120, 122, 208, 209, 214, 216, 218, 230, 302, 307, 308, 313, 319 Westbourne Lana - 105, 110, 116, 126 Wyckoff Avenue - 201 1/2, 203, 205, 301, 303-05, 403, 435 Heights 215, 216 218, 220, 225, 302, 207, 210, P. 84 212 210, 214, 504, 508, 222, 228, 419, 423,. 111 interested parties vill be given an opportunity to speak for or against designation at the hearing or may present written statements before the hearing to the Secretory, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, 108 Zaat Crean Street, Ithaca, NY 14850. Leslie A. Chatterton Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission 0-LAG-Cornell.Kgt • A CITY OF ITHACA 100 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 1 mACA LANDMARKS TELEPHONE: 272-1713 PRESERVATION COMMISSION CODE 607 Local Designation Cornell Heights At the regular monthly meeting held on August 14, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determined by unanimous vote that those portions of the proposed Cornell Heights National Register District located within the city limits meet criteria for local designation as stipulated in Section 32.3(3)\of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. By this action, the Commission recommends to the Common Council local historic district designation. See appendix Items 1 and 2 for a map and address list of the 131 affected properties. The Commission's vote followed a public hearing at which eleven property owners and representatives spoke in favor of designation and six property owners and representatives spoke against designation. In addition the Commission Chairperson read written comments in favor of local designation from three property owners -and written comments against local designation from three property owners. Prior to the vote recommending local designation, the Commission, as lead agency for the environmental review in -accordance with Section 32.6 1 of Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, determined by unanimous vote that the designation will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. This action constitutes a negative declaration and terminates the environmental review. The Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks. Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated state historic preservation office SHPO), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman. These findings, as prepared by the SHPO and presented to the Committee on the Registers at the hearing held in Albany on June 24, 1989 are item 3 of the appendix. EXHIBIT "B" Local Designation -2- Cornell Heights Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SIII'O. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifications define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. The Commission plans to forward its recommendation for local designation to the Common Council for consideration at the meeting to be held on September 6, 1989. This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 36.6c of the Ithaca Landmarkt Preservation Ordinance, wherein it is stated that the Commission "shall file a copy of the designation with the Planning Board and with Common Council". August 21, 1989 O-LC-Loca 1Des. Clit Appendix Item 1 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Map Appendix Item 2 Cornell heights Local Historic District Property List 1., 109 Marton Place 2. 104 Brook Land 3. 109 Dearborn Place 4. 116 Dearborn Place 5. 202 Dearborn Place 6. 208 Dearborn Place 7. 213 Dearborn Place 8. 215 Dearborn Place 9. 216 Dearborn Place 10. 1 Edgecliff Place 11. 101 Edgecliff Place 12. 112 Edgecliff Place 13. 202 Fall Creek Drive 14. 209-11 Fall Creek Drive 15. 212 Fall Creek Drive 16. 216 Fall Creek Drive 17. 218 Fall Creek Drive 18. 220 Fall Creek Drive 19. 225 Fall Creek Drive 20.. 302 Fall Creek Drive 21. 310 Fall Creek Drive 22. 316 Fall Creek Drive 23. 326 Fall Creek Drive 24. 110-12 Heights Court 25. 111-13 Heights Court 26. 114 Heights Court 27. 115 heights Court 28. 116-16i Heights Court 29. 118 Heights Court 30. 119 Heights Court 31. 120 Heights Court 32. 121 heights Court 33. 123 Heights Court 34. 125 Heights Court 35. 106 Highland Avenue 36. 110 highland Avenue 37. 150 Highland Avenue 38. 200 highland Avenue 39. 201 Highland Avenue 40. 203 Highland Avenue 41. 111 Kelvin Place 42. 114 Kelvin Place 43. 115 Kelvin Place 116 Kelvin Place 45. 121 Kelvin Place 46. 125 Kelvin Place 47. 126 Kelvin Place 48. 210 Kelvin Place 44. 49. 212 Kelvin Place 50. 1 Lodgeway 51. 5 Lodgeway 52. 6-6} Lodgeway 53. 8 Lodgeway 54. 10 Lodgeway 55. 105 Needham Place 56. 2 Ridgewood Road 57. 40 Ridgewood Road 58. 55 Ridgewood Road 59. 100 Ridgewood Road 60. 115 Ridgewood Road 61. 122 Roberts Place 62. 123 Roberts Place 63. 124 Roberts Place` 64. 900 Stewart Avenue 65. 916 Stewart Avenue 66. 934 Stewart Avenue 67. 1022 Stewart Avenue 68. 1024.Stewart Avenue 69. i02 The Knoll 70. 106 The Knoll 71. 111 The Knoll 72. 115 The Knoll 73. 1151 The Knoll 74. 119 The Knoll 75. 101 Thurston Avenue 76. 117 Thurston Avenue 77. 119 Thurston Avenue 78. 121 Thurston Avenue 79. 140 Thurston Avenue 80. 201 Thurston Avenue 81. 205 Thurston Avenue 82. 210 Thurston Avenue 83. 214 Thurston Avenue 84. 223 Thurston Avenue 85. 305 Thurston Avenue 86. 312 Thurston Avenue 87. 315 Thurston Avenue 88. 401 Thurston Avenue 89. 410 Thurston Avenue 90. 411 Thurston Avenue 91. 504 Thurston Avenue 92. 508 Thurston Avenue 93. 520-22 Thurston Avenue 94. 534 Thurston Avenue 95. 536 Thurston Avenue 96 102 Triphammer Road Appendix Item 2 Cornell heights local Historic District Property 97. 109 Triphammer Road 98. 110 Triphammer Road 99. 117 Triphammer Road 100. 118 Triphammer Road 101. 124 Triphammer Road 102. 150 Triphammer Road 103. 118 Wait Avenue 104. 120 Wait Avenue 105. 122 Wait Avenue 106. 208 Wait Avenue 107. 209 Wait Avenue 108. 214 Wait Avenue 109. 216 Wait Avenue 110. 218 Wait Avenue 111. 222 Wait Avenue 112. 228 Wait Avenue 113. 230 Wait Avenue 114. 302 Wait Avenue 115. 307 Wait Avenue 116. 308 Wait Avenue 117. 313 Wait Avenue 118. 319 Wait Avenue 119. 105 Westbourne Lane 120. 110 Westbourne Lane 121. 116 Westbourne Lane 122. 126 Westbourne Lane 123. 2011 Wyckoff Avenue 124. 203 Wyckoff Avenue 125. 205 Wyckoff Avenue 126. 301 Wyckoff Avenue 127. 303-05 Wyckoff Avenue 128. 403 Wyckoff Avenue 129. 419 Wyckoff Avenue 130. 425 Wyckoff Avenue 131. 435 Wyckoff Avenue Appendix Item 3 Cornell 'Heights Local Designation Historic and Architectural Significance Cornell Heights Historic District, Ithaca Period of Significance: 1898-1937 Areas of Significance: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Level of Significance: Local Proposal: The Cornell Heights historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (developed on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in the period after World War I, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique, was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs along the barren fringes of large cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell heights was promoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the- work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects, including William H. Miller. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell heights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to Cornell University's major expansion around -the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception, Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Heights and faculty members of national and international renown continue to make Cornell Heights their home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell. Heights Historic District illustrates an i mp()rtant ;n;1)ect: o1; American planning and recalls a significant: poi i uel In the history of Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: - I, the undersigned, am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, and $ 0 certify that the annexed Attorney's has been compared by 'me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy thereof. Certification 0 say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for ae Attorney'. . I have read the annexed v.rific.a.n know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be • by alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein Affirmation not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: The reason I make this affirmation instead of is I affirm that the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury. - Dated: Check Applicable Bo STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am (Print signer's name below signature) ❑ in the action herein; I have read the annexed 1n6vid.al know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be Verification alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. O the of corp..... a corporation, one of the parties to the action; I have read the annexed Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside at On , 19 , I served a true copy of the annexed in the following manner: O by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post -office or official depository of the U.S. Service Postal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressee(s) as indicated below: By Mail ❑ by delivering the same personally to the persons and at the addresses indicated below: Personal Service Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) Sir: Take notice of an of which the within is a copy, duly granted in the within entitled action, on the day of , 19 , and duly entered in the office of the Clerk of the County of on the day of 19 Dated , N.Y., 19 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 To Attorney for INDEX NO. YEAR 19 STATE OF NEW YORK s t t?"(A "le County of Tompkins COURT CARL SAGAN and ANN U[tUYAl�, PetitiAlVJ G yn. SUZANNE L,ICHTENSTEIN, ET AL., 'respondents Copy NOTICE OF PETITION AND PETIT/ON HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Pocitionars Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 Due and personal service of the within is admitted this day of 19 Attorney for JanJas Jo ain;sais 0 0 -„ 0 g M O 0 w0 3 5. c O co 0 0 0 a. 0 w ▪ = EL❑❑❑❑❑ - 0 Cb 1 ay e i; cr, • o� (n co i; 0 _ 0 CD C.. 0 0000❑ 0 cri < I' (c Cr3 CJI Co Co "1 VI O VI O ti - •1 ❑❑❑0❑ 0 C -1.D C < p co ( . O 0 : n. N g c° F0 0 0 0 0' co 0 '•1 0 0 0 0 K 0 _ 0 oa 0 O a. 0 0 0 0 a. 0 CD c 0 0 0 0 T v _ 0 0' 0 0 0 p 0 m s< 0 oa co0 0 •Y EL 0 J HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORk<IN L. BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO I SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 148.11 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents W R�C�IdEa AUG 31 1989 L.b CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Ithaca, N. Y. NOT 6 J OF PETITION ex No. g4/s RJI No. a 7- OS�� J. �,E PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed petition of ANN DRUYAN 1989, and upon all prior papers and proceedings herein and heretofore had, petitioners herein will apply to this.Court at a Special Term thereof to be held at the Tompkins County Court House in the City of Ithaca, New York, on the and duly verified the 29th day of August, 22nd day of Septembe 1989, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of said day or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for a judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules reversing and annulling the determination of respondent herein, The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, made the 14th day of August, 1989, which designated the premises owned.by petitioners and known as 900 Stewart Avenue a part of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District upon the ground that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and was not supported by substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 Dated: August 1989 2 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents PETITION Index No.. RJI No. J. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTY OF TOMPKINS: The petition of Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan respectfully alleges and shows to this Court as follows: 1. That petitioners are individuals residing at 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York. 2. That respondents Suzanne Lichtenstein, Paul Testa, Martha Preston, Alex Skutt, Barclay C. Jones, Elizabeth Whicher and Nancy Meltzer constituted the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission at a meeting of such municipal board conducted on August 14, 1989. That the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission is a duly appointed municipal board created under the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca as authorized by Section 96-a of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. 3. That respondent The City of Ithaca, New York, is a HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 municipal corporation having general governmental responsibility for the City of Ithaca, New York. 4. That petitioners are owners of premises -known as 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, New York, which consists of a residential dwelling constructed between 1978 and 1981 on the north rim of Fall Creek Gorge. 5. That petitioners' premises were formerly owned by the Sphinx Head Society, a fraternal organization of Cornell University students which constructed a windowless tomb -like masonry 6. Mensch, structure upon the premises in the 1920's. That petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen remodelled the structure originally built by the Sphinx Head Society and annexed to it the residential building which presently comprises petitioners' residence. 7. That following the remodelling work performed by petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, the windowless tomb -like building constructed by the Sphinx Head Society is substantially unidentifiable as an independently existing structure. 8. That prior to August 14, 1989, respondents herein caused to be published a notice of public hearing concerning the proposed designation of 131 residential premises within the City of Ithaca, New York, as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District"; a copy of the aforesaid notice is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "A". 2 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 9. That petitioners, by their attorneys, thereafter appeared before respondent The Landmarks Preservation Commis- sion on August 14, 1989, to protest the inclusion of their property in the proposed Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 10. That on or about August 14, 1989, the respondent Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to designate the 131 properties specified in the notice of public hearing as a "historic district" to be known as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 11. That the inclusion of petitioners' property in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was arbitrary, capricious and the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was not founded upon substantial evidence for the following reasons: (a) The inclusion of petitioners' property in an area designated an "historic district" does not fulfill the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. (b) The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission failed to make any findings of fact which would support the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area designated an "historic district". (c) The record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission does not contain expert opinion favor- able to the inclusion of petitioners' property in the area 3 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS ANO COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 designated an "historic district", as required by Section 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Requirements for Inclusion in an "Historic District" 12. That an "historic district" is defined in Section 32.3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: "Historic District" shall mean an area which contains improvements which a. Have special character or special historicalor aesthetical interest or value; and b. Represent one or more periods or styles of archi- tecture typical of one or more eras of the history of the City; and c. Cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City. 13. That petitioners believe that in order to justify inclusion within an "historic district" their property must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 14. That inasmuch as petitioners' residence was constructed within the last 10 years, petitioners' residence has no special historical interest or value. 15. That petitioners' residence has no special aesthetical interest or value insofar as is known to petitioners. 16. That the remains of the tomb -like masonry structure constructed by the Sphinx Head Society which has been incor- porated into petitioners' residence was so altered and changed in appearance by petitioners' predecessor in title that any 4 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 special historical or aesthetical interest which it may have had has been obliterated. 17. That petitioners' residence is entirely dissimilar to any of the 130 other properties included by respondents in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and does not represent any period or style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca. 18. That the remains of the Sphinx Head building, to the extent that it is visible, does not represent any style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca, and is in fact entirely atypical of any other structure contained within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 19. That the area designated by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", with or without the inclusion of petitioners' property, does not constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City by reason of the existence of structures having special historical or aesthetical interest representative of one or more periods or styles of architecture or typical of one or more eras in the history of the City of Ithaca. 20. That petitioners respectfully submit that based upon the criteria set forth in Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca there is no rational reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and the designation of petitioners' property as a part of such district by the respondent Ithaca 5 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14651 Landmarks Preservation Commission was therefore arbitrary and capricious. • Failure to Make Findings of Fact 21. That Section 32.5 (D) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code requires that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission "shall keep a record which shall be open to the public view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions". 22. That to the best. of petitioners' knowledge and belief, the only record of the proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission on August 14, 1989, consists of a memorandum, with attachments, a copy of which is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B". 23. That the aforesaid memorandum contains no finding of fact setting forth the reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 24. That absent proper findings of fact by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, as required by Section 32.5 (D) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the actions of that municipal board may not be properly reviewed by this Court. 25. That the aforesaid memorandum, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", contains the statement that "the Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for a local designation on findings of historic and 6 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated State Historic Preservation Office), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman"; the aforesaid findings are annexed to the memorandum set forth herein as Exhibit "B"". 26. That the findings of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation do not mention petitioners' property and none of the areas of significance discussed in those findings would appear to pertain to petitioners' property. 27. That in the absence of findings of fact justifying the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" the inclusion of petitioners' property within such district by the Ithaca Landmarks Preser- vation Commission was arbitrary and capricious. Lack of Expert Opinion Favorable to Inclusion of Petitioners' Property in the Historic District 28. That Section 32.6 (B) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code provides as follows: In no event shall a landmark or district be designated until the Commission has conducted a public hearing thereon. In the event that architectural style is a basis for such designation, the Commission shall not proceed to designate any landmark or district until the record il- lustrates the existence of expert opinion favorable to such a designation. 7 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN E. BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO 51 . SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 29. That as indicated by the notice of public hearing (Exhibit "A" annexed hereto), "architecture" was the chief area of significance cited by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission for its proposed designation of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 30. That the record of proceedings of the meeting of August 14, 1989, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", sets forth no "expert opinion" favorable to the designation of petitioners' property as a part of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 31. That the memorandum of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (Exhibit "B" annexed hereto) contains the following statement: Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifi- cations define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. 32. That the "consultant" mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum is not identified. 33. That the expert qualifications of the consultant mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum are not set forth in the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation 8 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Commission. That upon information and belief, the "consultant" employed by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation who compiled the survey of the properties located within the proposed "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was not qualified in the field of architecture within the definition of 36 CFR Section 61.4 (d)(1). 34. That petitioners believe that in order to support a finding that the architectural style of their property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must demonstrate the existence of expert opinion in the field of architecture favorable to such a designation. 35. That the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that the architectural style of petitioners' property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" is therefore not founded upon substantial evidence. 36. That no prior application has been made to any court for the relief requested herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners demand judgment reversing and annulling the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission dated August 14, 1989, which included petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", on the basis that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and not founded upon 9 HOLMBERG. GALS Ar;'t-1- HCLMBERG. ORKIN F, 3ENNF•i T ATTGRTEV ANC COUNSELORS AT LAW .770 EAST elfF:AW T. SJrTE soc P. O. BOX 6SOQ 1-1,AC A. NnW V ....WO: 74aij' substantial evidence/ together with SuC ;Q ri further er different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: August ,R1 1989 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200. E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 STATE QF CAL $ORNIA . COUNTY OF L081 UCELIS : SS . CITY OF RA ADE1 A ft k) 7)RO 1O J , being duly sworn, deposes and says:. That I am one of the Petitioners in the action herein; I have read the annexed Petition and know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters I believe em to be true. Sworn to before me this ?Mr4 ay of August, 1989. NOTARY P BLIC yj;*ty1WM***4**444ac*:t*** Wkey i:***4"•44i4 OFFICIAL SEAL 1,,1' r&+ LUCINDA W. DAIL.EY * * LOS ANGELES COUNTY My—Commission Expires April 27. 1990 **********f.; i****44***********4*kp*^ "406-64 0.,X1,41 NOTARY PLIOLIC--CALIEORNA *. -4•;:5,-I '1 NOTARY BOND FILED IN j. 10 ITHACA LANDMAFI(e • prttsmATION COMMI9610N rRun DKUYRN/SfBAN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 CITY OP ITHACA 10(4 EMIT GREEN STPIEOT ITHACA, NOW YORK 142LC0 P. 82 TILEPHONL; 272.1713 CODA 107 LOCAL Dk$IGNAZ'IOH Local designation protects the city's architecturally and/or historically significant properties under Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, the terms of the Ithaca rhe or inane* empowers the (Chapter 32, Preservation Co G Commission to approvep t ace Landm■rks Preservation Commissi nt, aor deny request' for exterior alteration. hearing. The it or demolition, after a review and -public building or demolition processis triggered by the application for a building ding orze is a d permit from the Building Commissioner. designated historic district, nocal landmark If have been o ►permit can ' °r be sue ed un Within a Secretor bee approved by the Commission. The Commiaaion use. lthesns the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation as review criteria. Applicants in sagresment wit dee the Commission can take appeals the ` pp • to Common Council. inion= of Overall the process serves toi • provide property owners with informed recommendations regarding design, materials, and technical appropriate tp the rehabilitation of historic prop operties, prevent hasty demolition or inappropriate alterations to city's designated architectural and historic resources, • ensure that new development will not depreciate the value of significant structural and/or areas located nearby. As a final note, local designation has lad to stabilization of neighborhoods and improvements to building stock and can increase Property value and sales potential. O—LC—designtn.lcl An [MW Oooawnvr imOinr w .. r 4n .n Ad�nm.µ• &M on hvn nluyf.,q` ... .. \. �..... w.F..: �..�.\r.•14 �..M\♦• ...J...•M.w..\.y.aWr... -..\M•fM ...y.. Iw f...yr....f '.Alf.y. • ./ .L ..,N eV.... rr.f..e......,„•••••••; �•.S LVM.�.a •'IAt.W..r EXHIBIT "A" A I) G 88/12/12_ 11 3� FR �M pRpillti/S118RN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 117 oT1 corn 1 Areasdofrsignificanif cancel Laval of significances is 898-1937 Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Cp>tlmunity Planning Local P. 83 Tct The Corornell Heights Historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an excptionall intactdexa plc of a turn -of -the -century planned reste placed in an outstanding natural setting al_ongQ the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlookinghtheicit of eItiacalinand athe street southern tip oZ Cayuga plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, f strictly residential characterd(d lopbpedment onaln a pIt e piivatetlots) and its historical pattern ranantio tradition of the "ideal" reeidence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil Var. This idea gained its greatest momentum in theeriod after World War X, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialised city. The pattern of develo went here, distinguished by an association With a sings land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not ba ique was rinses usualoflargen an era in which trolley suburbs along o cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell Heights was promoted by its owners as ahigh- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected hers between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects) i.ncluhding William H.'Hiller. A further dimension oZ significance sterna from the intivats relationship between cornell Heights and Cornell university. The impetus toward development of the subdivision Was closely linked to . Cornell t9niversity's' major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of =theca and a arked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as home for many of the university's professera and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Height's and faculty members of national and international renown continue to snake Cornell Heights their home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic District illustrates an important aspect of American planning and recalls a significant period in the history of Ithaca. 88ie2r1ttlla, 111.34 FROM pRJJ 1iiSR¢RN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 P.54 NOTICE OF PU LIC 11ARU10 cm TEE LOCAL DESIGNATION OF TUI COIULL RZIGETS HISTORIC DISTRICT Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Section 32.6A of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Coda, Ithaca Landmarks ?reservation Ordinance, * public peering will be held on August 14,1989 at ll, 1t8 7iO0 p.m. in common Council Chambers, 3rd floor, y H East Crean Street, to hear testimony Concerning the designation of the Cornell Heights Historic District. The following properties are included in the proposed historic districts Barton Pl.oe - 109 Brook Lana - 104 Dearborn Placa - 109, 116, 202, 208, 213, 215, 216 Edgscliff ?lace.- 1, 101, 112 218,220,225, 302, Fell Creak Drive - 202, 209-11, 212, 216, 310, 316, 326 Heights Court - Ii0-12, 211-23. 114. 113 • 116-16 1/2. 11*, 119, 120, 121, 123, 125 Highland Avenue - 106, 110, 130, 200, 20i, 203 Kelvin Place - 111, 114, 115, 116, 121, 125, 126, 207, 210, 212 Lodgeway - 1, 5, 6-6 1/2, 8, 10 Needham Place - 105 Ridgewood Road - 2, 40, 55, 100, 115 Roberts Place - 122, 123, 124 Stewart Avenue - 900, 916, 934 1022, 1024 The Knoll - 102, 106, 111, 113, 115 1/2, 119 Thurston Avenue .. 101. 117, 119, 121, 140, 201, 203, 210, 214, 223, 303, 332, 315, 401. 410, 411. 504, 508. 520-22, 534, 536 Triphammer Road - 102, 109, 110, 117, 118, 124, 150 Wait Avenue - 118, 120, 122, 208, 209, 214, 216, 218, 222, 228, 230, 302, 307, 308. 313, 319 Westbourne Lana - 105, 110, 116, 126 Wyckoff Lvenu. - 201 1/2, 203, 205. 301. 303-03, 403. 419, 423. 433 L11 interested parties will bt given an opportntYtospeek for or against designation at the bearing or may present statements before the hearing to the Secretory, Ithaca Landmarks Pxesarvation Commission, 108 last Crean Street, Ithaca. NY 14850. Leslie A. Chatterton Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission 0-LAC-C0rnell.Hgt • A CITY OF • ITHACA 100 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14H5O I rIIACA LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION Local Designation Cornell Heights TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 At the regular monthly meeting held on August 14, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determined by unanimous vote that those portions of the proposed Cornell Heights National Register District located within the city limits meet criteria for local designation as stipulated in Section 32.3(3) of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. By this action, the Commission recommends to the Common Council local historic district designation. See appendix Items 1 and 2 for a map and address list of the 131 affected properties. The Commission's vote followed a public hearing at which eleven property owners and representatives spoke in favor of designation and six property owners and representatives spoke against designation. In addition the Commission Chairperson read written comments in favor of local designation from three property owners and written comments against local designation from three property owners. Prior to the vote recommending local designation, the Commission, as lead agency for the environmental review in accordance with Section 32.6 1 of Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, determined by unanimous vote that the designation will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. This action constitutes a negative declaration and terminates the environmental review. The Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated state historic preservation office SHPO), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks Recreation and historic Preservation, Orin Lehman. These findings, as prepared by the SHPO and presented to the Committee on the Registers at the hearing held in_ Albany on June 24, 1989 are item 3 of the. appendix. EXHIBIT "B" Local Designation -2- Cornell Heights Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SIIPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifications define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. The Commission plans to forward its recommendation for local designation to the Common Council for consideration at the meeting to be held on September 6, 1989. This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 36.6c of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, wherein it is stated that the Commission "shall file a copy of the designation with the Planning Board and with Common Council". August 21, 1989 O-LC-LocalDes.CHt Appendix Iter► 1 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Map i Appendix Item 2 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Property List 1. 109 Barton Place 2. 104 Brook Land 3. 109 Dearborn Place 4. 116 Dearborn Place 5. 202 Dearborn Place 6. 208 Dearborn Place 7. 213 Dearborn Place 8. 215 Dearborn Place 9. 216 Dearborn Place 10. 1 Edgecliff Place 11. 101 Edgecliff Place 12. 112 Edgecliff Place 13. 202 Fall Creek Drive 14. 209-11 Fall Creek Drive 15. 212 Fall Creek Drive 16. 216 Fall Creek Drive 17. 218 Fall Creek Drive 18. 220 Fall Creek Drive 19. 225 Fall Creek Drive 20. 302 Fall Creek Drive 21. 310 Fall Creek Drive 22. 316 Fall Creek Drive 23. 326 Fall Creek Drive 24. 110-12 Heights Court 25. 111-13 Heights Court 26. 114 Heights Court 27. 115 Heights Court 28. 116-16} Heights Court 29. 118 Heights Court 30. 119 Heights Court 31. 120 Heights Court 32. 121 Heights Court 33. 123 Heights Court 34. 125 Ileights Court 35. 106 highland Avenue 36. 110 Ilighland Avenue 37. 150 highland Avenue 38. 200 Highland Avenue 39. 201 Ilighland Avenue 40. 203 Highland Avenue 41. 111 Kelvin Place 42. 114 Kelvin Place 43. 115 Kelvin Place 116 Kelvin Place 45. 121 Kelvin Place 46. 125 Kelvin Place 47. 126 Kelvin Place 48. 210 Kelvin Place 44. 49. 212 Kelvin Place 50. 1 Lodgeway 51. 5 Lodgeway 52. 6-6} Lodgeway 53. 8 Lodgeway 54. 10 Lodgeway 55. 105 Needham Place 56. 2 Ridgewood Road 57. 40 Ridgewood Road 58. 55 Ridgewood Road 59. 100 Ridgewood Road 60. 115 Ridgewood Road 61. 122 Roberts Place 62. 123 Roberts Place 63. 124 Roberts Place' 64. 900 Stewart Avenue 65. 916 Stewart Avenue 66. 934 Stewart Avenue 67. 1022 Stewart Avenue 68. 1024.Stewart Avenue 69. i02 The Knoll 70. 106 The Knoll 71. 111 The Knoll 72. 115 The Knoll 73. 115} The Knoll 74. 119 The Knoll 75. 101 Thurston Avenue 76. 117 Thurston Avenue 77. 119 Thurston Avenue 78. 121 Thurston Avenue 79. 140 Thurston Avenue 80. 201 Thurston Avenue 81. 205 Thurston Avenue 82. 210 Thurston Avenue 83. 214 Thurston Avenue 84. 223 Thurston Avenue 85. 305 Thurston Avenue 86. 312 Thurston Avenue 87. 315 Thurston Avenue 88. 401 Thurston Avenue 89. 410 Thurston Avenue 90. 411 Thurston Avenue 91. 504 Thurston Avenue 92. 508 Thurston Avenue 93. 520-22 Thurston Avenue 94. 534 Thurston Avenue 95. 536 Thurston Avenue 96 102 Triphammer Road Appendix Item 2 Cornell heights local Historic District Property 97. 109 Triphammer Road 98. 110 Triphammer Road 99. 117 Triphammer Road 100. 118 Triphammer Road 101. 124 Triphammer Road 102. 150 Triphammer Road 103. 118 Wait Avenue 104. 120 Wait Avenue 105. 122 Wait Avenue 106. 208 Wait Avenue 107. 209 Wait Avenue 108. 214 Wait Avenue 109. 216 Wait Avenue 110. 218 Wait Avenue 111. 222 Wait Avenue 112. 228 Wait Avenue 113. 230 Wait Avenue 114. 302 Wait Avenue 115. 307 Wait Avenue 116. 308 Wait Avenue 117. 313 Wait Avenue 118. 319 Wait Avenue 119. 105 Westbourne Lane 120. 110 Westbourne Lane 121. 116 Westbourne Lane 122. 126 Westbourne Lane 123. 201} Wyckoff Avenue 124. 203 Wyckoff Avenue 125. 205 Wyckoff Avenue 126. 301 Wyckoff Avenue 127. 303-05 Wyckoff Avenue 128. 403 Wyckoff Avenue 129. 419 Wyckoff Avenue 130. 425 Wyckoff Avenue 131. 435 Wyckoff Avenue Appendix Item 3 Cornell'Heights Local Designation Historic and Architectural Significance .I'oml 10..n:.; __c.ou n ty Cornell. Heights Historic District, Ithaca Period of Significance: 1898-1937 Areas of Significance: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Level of Significance: Local Proposal: The Cornell Heights historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (devel'oped on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in the period after World War I, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern_ industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique, was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs along the barren fringes of large cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property owners. Cornell IIeights was promoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects, including William H. Miller. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell IIeights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to Cornell University's major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception, Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as Home for many of the university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the university resided in Cornell Heights and faculty members of national and international renown continue to make (ornel l Heights: their home today. Retaining a high level of i ilt eclt: it_y, the Cornell. Heights Historic District illustrates an important aspect of American planning and recalls: rt significant poi i ocl in the history o I Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: - I, the undersigned, am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, and $ ❑ certify that the annexed ° Attorney'. has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy thereof. Certification 6 ❑ a Attorney'. yverification by Affirmation say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for . I have read the annexed know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: The reason I make this affirmation instead of is I affirm that the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury. - Dated: Check Applicable Box STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am (Print signer's tame below signature) • in the action herein; I have read the annexed Individual know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be Verification alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. ❑ the of Corporate a corporation, one of the parties to the action; I have read the annexed verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated tobe alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) STATE OF s NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside at On , 19 , I served a true copy of the annexed in the following manner: ❑ by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post -office or official depository of the U.S. Service Postal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressee(s) as indicated below: By Mail a ▪ ❑ by delivering the same personally to the persons and at the addresses indicated below: • Personal tl Service Sworn to before me on , 19 (Print signer's name below signature) Sir: Take notice of an of which the within is a copy, duly granted in the within entitled action, on the day of , 19 , and duly entered in the office of the Clerk of the County of on the day of 19 Dated , N.Y., 19 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 To Attorney for INDEX NO. YEAII 19 STATE OF NEW YORK suprwArs COURT County of Tompkins CARL SAGAN and ANN UaUYA15, Petitiri[3arG ii F3. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, ET AL., :'respondents Copy NOTICE OF PETITION AND PI; !TLOri HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for t?a c1. tionars Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 Due and personal service of the within admitted this day of 19 is Attorney for iansas Jo asn;BAs 0 TB `aur aio}aq 01 °, co 7:. w0' -moi o �• (Dz CU a, :5 sa y 0000❑- q w <o: cn O� C-+ .p p fD 0 w t o y '+ cn o cn C7 Fi 0 0 9 o •or c• `o fD SI < w 8a. "r' °, O (D ❑0000 0cn(1uiC 7, .. o A. < u).. os o 5- co m � a) cn cn .CD, ,.o-. , . " c5 cd CS c, ,O, o0 o `< O co aD 0000❑ <Ornw�co CD CD CD CD CDrr8 cam- 7 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents NOTICE OF AMENDED PETITION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexepetition of ANN DRUYAN duly verified the 7vOL day of September, 1989, and upon all prior papers and proceedings herein and heretofore had, petitioners herein will apply to this Court at a Special Term thereof to be held at the Tompkins County Court House in. the City of Ithaca, New York, on the 22nd day of September, 1989, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon of said day or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for a judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules reversing and annulling the determination of respondent herein, The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, made the 14th day of August, 1989, as approved by the respondent herein, The City of Ithaca, New York, by resolution of the Common Council dated September 6, 1989, which designated the premises owned by petitioners and known as 900 Stewart Avenue a part of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District upon the ground that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and was not supported by substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: September 7 , 1989 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, PAUL TESTA, MARTHA PRESTON, ALEX SKUTT, BARCLAY C. JONES, ELIZABETH WHICHER and NANCY MELTZER, constituting. the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and THE CITY OF ITHACA, NEW YORK, Respondents AMENDED PETITION Index No. 89-815 RJI No. 89-0545 J. Rose TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COUNTY OF TOMPKINS: The amended petition of Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan respectfully alleges and shows to this Court as follows: 1. That petitioners are individuals residing at 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York. 2. That respondents Suzanne Lichtenstein, Paul Testa, Martha Preston, Alex Skutt, Barclay C. Jones, Elizabeth Whicher and Nancy Meltzer constituted the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission at a meeting of such municipal board conducted on August 14, 1989. That the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- mission is a duly appointed municipal board created under the provisions of Chapter 32 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca as authorized by Section 96-a of the General Municipal Law of the State of New York. HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 3. That respondent The City of Ithaca, New York, is a municipal corporation having general governmental responsi- bility for the City of Ithaca, New York. 4. That petitioners are owners of premises known as 900 Stewart Avenue in the City of Ithaca, New York, which consists of a residential dwelling constructed between 1978 and 1981 on the north rim of Fall Creek Gorge. 5. That petitionerspremises were formerly owned by the Sphinx Head Society, a fraternal organization of Cornell University students which constructed a windowless tomb -like masonry structure upon the premises in the 1920's. 6. That petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, remodelled the structure originally built by the Sphinx Head Society and annexed to it the residential building which presently comprises petitioners' residence. 7. That following the remodelling work performed by petitioners' predecessor in title, Stephen Mensch, the windowless tomb -like building constructed by the Sphinx Head Society is substantially unidentifiable as an independently existing structure. 8. That prior to August 14, 1989, respondents herein caused to be published a notice of public hearing concerning the proposed designation of 131 residential premises within the City of Ithaca, New York, as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District"; a copy of the aforesaid notice is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "A". HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 9. That petitioners, by their attorneys, thereafter appeared before respondent The Landmarks Preservation Commis— sion on August 14, 1989, to protest the inclusion of their property in the proposed Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 10. That on or about August 14, 1989, the respondent Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission voted to designate the 131 properties specified in the notice of public hearing as a "historic district" to be known as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 11. That the inclusion of petitioners' property in. the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" was arbitrary, capricious and the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission was not founded upon substantial evidence for the following reasons: (a) The inclusion of petitioners' property in designated an "historic district" does not fulfill the of Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the Ithaca. (b) The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission an area criteria City of to make any findings of fact of petitioners' property in district". (c) The record failed which would support the inclusion the area designated an "historic of proceedings Preservation Commission able to the inclusion before the Ithaca Landmarks does not contain expert opinion favor - of petitioners' property in the area 3 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 designated an "historic district", as required by Section 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca. Requirements for Inclusion in an "Historic District" 12. That an "historic district" is defined in Section 32.3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: "Historic District" shall mean an area which contains improvements which a. Have special character or special historical or aesthetical interest or value; and b. Represent one or more periods or styles of archi- tecture typical of one or more eras of the history of the City; and c. Cause such area, by reason of such factors, to constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City. 13. That petitioners believe that in order to justify inclusion within an "historic district" their property must satisfy all of the criteria of Section 32.3 (3) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. 14. That inasmuch as petitioners' residence was constructed within the last 10 years, petitioners' residence has no special historical interest or value. 15. That petitioners' residence has no special aesthetical interest or value insofar as is known to petitioners. 16. That the remains of the tomb -like masonry structure constructed by the Sphinx Head Society which has been incor- porated into petitioners' residence was so altered and changed in appearance by petitioners' predecessor in title that any. HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 special historical or aesthetical interest which it may have had has been obliterated. 17. That petitioners' residence is entirely dissimilar to any of the 130 other properties included by respondents in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and does not represent any period or style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca. 18. That the remains of the Sphinx Head building, to the extent that it is visible, does not represent any style of architecture typical of any era in the history of the City of Ithaca, and is in fact entirely atypical of any other structure contained within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 19. That the area designated by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission as the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", with or without the inclusion of petitioners' property, does not constitute a visibly perceptible section of the City by reason of the existence of structures having special historical or aesthetical interest representative of one or more periods or styles of architecture or typical of one or more eras in the history of the City of Ithaca. 20. That petitioners respectfully submit that based upon the criteria set forth in. Section 32.3 (3) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca there is no rational reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" and the designation of petitioners' property as a part of such district by the respondent Ithaca HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 Landmarks Preservation Commission was therefore arbitrary and capricious. Failure to Make Findings of Fact 21. That Section 32.5 (D) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code requires that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission "shall keep a record which shall be open to the public view, of its resolutions, proceedings and actions". 22. That to the best of petitioners' knowledge and belief, the only record of the proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission on. August 14, 1989, consists of a memorandum, with attachments, a copy of which is annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B". 23. That the aforesaid memorandum contains no finding of fact setting forth the reason for the inclusion of petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 24. That absent proper findings of fact by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, as required by Section 32.5 (D) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, the actions of that municipal board may not be properly reviewed by this Court. 25. That the aforesaid memorandum, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit contains the statement that "the Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for a local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (also the designated State Historic Preservation Office), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Orin Lehman"; the aforesaid findings are annexed to the memorandum set forth herein as Exhibit "B". 26. That the findings of the New York State, Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation do not mention petitioners' property and none of the areas of significance discussed in those findings would appear to pertain to petitioners' property. 27. That in the absence of findings of fact justifying the inclusion of petitioners' property within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" the inclusion of petitioners' property within such district by the Ithaca Landmarks Preser- vation Commission was arbitrary and capricious. Lack of Expert Opinion Favorable to Inclusion of Petitioners' Property in the Historic District 28. That Section 32.6 (B) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code provides as follows: In no event shall a landmark or district be designated until the Commission has conducted a public hearing thereon. In the event that architectural style is a basis for. such designation, the Commission shall not proceed to designate any landmark or district until therecord il- lustrates the existence of expert opinion favorable to such a designation. 29. That as indicated by the notice of public hearing (Exhibit "A" annexed hereto), "architecture" was the chief area of significance cited by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Com- 7 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 mission for its proposed designation of the Cornell Heights Local Historic District. 30. That the record of proceedings of the meeting of August 14, 1989, annexed hereto and designated Exhibit "B", sets forth no "expert opinion" favorable to the designation of petitioners' property as a part of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District". 31. That the memorandum of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (Exhibit "B" annexed hereto) contains the following statement: Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SHPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifi- cations define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. 32. That the "consultant" mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum isnot identified. 33. That the expert qualifications of the consultant mentioned in the aforesaid memorandum are not set forth in the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission. That upon information and belief, the "consultant" employed by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation who compiled the survey of the properties located within the proposed "Cornell Heights Local Historic 8 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 District" was not qualified in the field of architecture within the definition of 36 CFR Section 61.4 (d)(1). 34. That petitioners believe that in order to support a finding that the architectural style of their property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", the record of proceedings before the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must demonstrate the existence of expert opinion in the field of architecture favorable to such a designation. 35. That the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission that the architectural style of petitioners' property justifies its inclusion in the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District" is therefore not founded upon substantial evidence. 36. That on or about September 6, 1989, respondent herein, The City of Ithaca, New York, acting through its legislative body, the Common Council, approved by resolution the designation of the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", including the premises of petitioners herein as described hereinabove. 37. That the action of respondent, The City of Ithaca, New York, acting through its legislative body, the Common Council, violates Sections 32.3 (3) and 32.6 (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca for the reasons set forth hereinabove. 38. That in the event that this Court should determine that the governmental action sought to be reviewed herein is HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 leglislative rather than administrative, petitioners respect- fully request that this proceeding be converted to an action for a declaratory judgment pursuant to the provisions of Section 103 (c) of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. 39. That no prior application has been made to any court for the relief requested herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners demand judgment reversing and annulling the determination of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission dated August 14, 1989, as approved by the City of Ithaca Common Council by resolution dated September 6, 1989, which included petitioners' property at 900 Stewart Avenue within the "Cornell Heights Local Historic District", on the basis that such determination was arbitrary, capricious and not founded upon substantial evidence, together with such other, further or different relief as to this Court may seem just and proper. Dated: September I, 1989 10 Pet tioner HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office & Post Office Address: 200 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 502 P.O. Box 6599 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 (607) 273-5475 STATE OF NEW YORK . COUNTY OF TOMPKINS SS. CITY OF ITHACA • ANN DRUYAN, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That I am one of the Petitioners in the action herein; I have read the annexed Amended Petition and know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters I believe them to be true. Sworn to before me this 99" day of September, 1989. NOTARY PUBLIC DELORES S. HARIN Notary Public, State of New No. 4766345 Qualified in Tompkins County Commission Fxnnr� ....ne in 199 HOLMBERG. GALBRAITH. HOLMBERG. ORKIN & BENNETT ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 200 EAST BUFFALO ST. SUITE 502 P. O. BOX 6599 ITHACA. NEW YORK 14851 11 ANN D UYAN ALL STATE LEGAL SUPPLY CO. ONE COMMERCE DRIVE, CRANFORD, NEW JERSEY 07016 Exhibit A (2) EDI 1 • ITHACA LANDMARKS McSRVAT10N COMMI66ION r►cuM DRUYRN/SAORN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776258 CITY CA ITH{ACA 106 EAST QREiN WRIEST 11"NACA, NRW YORK 14R6p P.82 T/LEPHONE; 272.1113 conga? LOCAL DISIONATloa Local deiitnstion protects the � Local designation n significant city's architectural) Landmarks Preservation Or. properties under o and/or the tarns of the Ithaca the or inane* empowers the �(Chapter.�Z, Municipal filo a Commission- to a t eta Landmarks Preservation Co 0 Commi si replacement, approve or deny request■ for exterior alteration. hearing. The addition Or demolition, after a review and hearibuildingprocess is triggered by the application forualla ue structurelapermit from the Euildin deaignruct historic ac desdisignated local landmark o Commissioner. If have_ been o , or luedted it plans s approved by the Commission. Then be issued until e n •Secretar of Che Interior's Standards fo.reRehabilitationCOmminsion sas t a s review' criteria. cps the Cemcriteri .cAppkic nes in 'agreement wit• dec the ppea1e to Common Council - Overall of Overall the proCeaa•ssrves t-oi provide property owners. with informed recoromend.ti011s regarding design, materials, and technical procedures appropriate to the rehabilitation of historic prevent hast properties, City's dai nndemolition or inappropriate alterations to g e architectural and historic resources, ensure that new davilopment will not depreciate the value of significant structures and/or areas located nearby.. • As a final note, local designation has led to stabilisation neighborhoods and improvements to building stock and can of property value and sales potential. of O—LC—designtn.lcl "An IMy) OoowWnyp /'upon w.4n an 4 tfurnslivi news 14ogr•01` EXHIBIT "A" •.w1rw.... �• •••••� — - r • •..rr•••••••• ••••Id• •lw..1....•...r a.W._..._ a • v.r:..,,... Au 88/1 2i1u& 11 3L `FRDM pksy_BvSRBRN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776238 To1.plclfa Cofll y .• Per od of Sgnif canoes 898-1937' Areas of • Significancs1 ArchlitteCt muniye,PLandsicape Architecture, CoLevel of significances Local P.e3 gogdl t The Cornell heights Historic -District 1$ architecturallyand historically significant as an exceptional intact exampe of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development plao.d in an outstanding natural.setting along the northern rib of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip or Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish -landscape features; dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (developed on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the roaantio tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and'populariced by rredarick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its greatest momentum in theeriod after World War X, as the.uppsr middle class sought to.retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialised city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services .of 7.anducape a rchitect.(William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtual.ly-every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision,.though not bunique, was en ofual in aarin an era in which trolley suburbs along o cities; were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators,. contractors, and private property owners. Cornell. Heights wasroaaoted by its owners as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that Cashion. Hornet', both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and 1937. They were all built to individualized designs -and . several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn -of -the - century architects) i.noluuding 'Willies H. Miller. A further dimension of significance-ste*s from the intimate relationship between Cornell Heights and Cornell university. The impetus toward development of the subdivision was closely linked to . Cornel]. University's major expansion around the turn-of-tne- centu-ry, a program that had a.tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception Cornell Heights was considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell university itself and it' served as home for many of the 'university's professors and students. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth century of the univereity resided in Cornell Heights and faculty 'members of national and international renown continue to make Cornell Heights their home today.- Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell Heights Historic. District illustrates an important aspect of American) planning and recalls a significant period in the history of Ithaca. A 7J to 88/02/1 V& 111.3t.._ FROF4 p1;,UVINJSRQRN 11 TYLER RD. TO 2776238 NOTICE OF lu$L1C IZALl;10 01 TIE LOCAL DZSIOIATY0x OF TS' CORNELL FEMME 1cla'=ORMC DZSTEZCT P. 84 Notice is hereby given that in accordance with Section 32.6A of Chapter 92 of the Municipal Cods, Ithaca Lendmerks Preservation Ordinance, a Public Hearing will be held on August 14, 1989 at 7100 p.a. in Common Council Chambers, 3rd floor, City Hall, 108 rest Green Street, to hoar testimony concerning tbs designation of the Cornell Heights Historic District. The following properties ars included in the proposed historic district= Barton Place - 109 Brook Lana 104 Dearborn Place - 109, 116, 202, 208, 213, 215, 216 Pdgscliff Place. - 1, 101, 112 • Fall Creak Drive 202, 209-11, 212, 216, 218, 220, 310, 316, 326 Heights Court - 110-12, 411-13. 114. 115. 119, 120, 121, 123, 125 203 Highland Avenue x'106, 110, 150, 200, 201, Kelvin Placa 111. 114, 113, 116, 121, 125, 126, Lodgeway - 1, 5, 6-6 1/2, 8, 10 Needham Placa - 103 Ridgewood Road - 2, 40. 55, 100, 115 Roberts Place - 122, 123. 124 Stewart Avenue --900, 916, 934, 1022, 1024 The Knoll - 102, 106,, 111, 113, 115 1/2, 119' Thurston Avenue 101, 117, 119, 121, 140, 201, 205., 223, 305. 312, 315, 401, 410, 411, 520-22, 534, 336 . Triphammer Road - 102, 109, 110, 117, 118, 124, 130 'Wait Avenue - 118, 120, 122. 208, 209, 214, 216, 218, 230, 302, 307, 308..313, 319 Westbourns Lane - 105, 110, 116, 126 Wyckoff Avenue -'201 1/2, 203, 205. 301. 303-05, 403. 435 225, 302, 116-16 1/2. 118. 207, 210. 212 210, 304, 214, 508, 222, 228, 419, 425, All interested parties vill begiven an opportunity to speak for or against designation at the bearing or may present written statements before the hearing to the Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Prerarvation Commission, 108 East Crean Street,` Ithaca, 1Y 14850. Leslie A. Chatterto' Secretary, Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission 0-LAC-Cornel1.Hgt 989 • m_vivy Fc0. -• 1. •• • ...1;f:•.1c1:4$7.1... • .;""a • o 277625.9 sr.%?se!":••I' :,••• • • ••• . • P • Mb ICJ 40— • :.,74."1114:Y.1'.V;::'... • •••. • . • •••• • • ,.." •;(1.,;(.. •• ft: • ; • • • • • ; . • - • k•,-). - • ••• :. • • • • ••:,.•-• . • **.j.tqWi.•!... • • • . • • •••••••,gye:i •:••••• *.• ' • •:2 i• ., • ;•+ ••=ltp-• 'n . ,:%i4:4•-•'••• • •-• • .4 • • • :t •• • • • ••••••': • I • •• • ••• I • VI.. • •'" • 111: • • • ••• A .. +:.• • • " • • • 1•• • • r tk. 0Y: '7 :• ;••.-5.':: • • • F:•.:*- • •.• • ,:•*) . • x.• • ': •` i•P:•.tr.'•••1. kl•`;•••:,* • r . ' • ' i ". • , • "; • •••, • •• ' • . • ALL STATE LEGAL SUPPLY CO. ONE COMMERCE DRIVE. CRA,IF0RD, NEW JERSEY 07016 jz& tars___A � v (2) Exhibit B ED11 CITY OF. ITHACA 100 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14050 I f I1ACA LANDMARKS PRESERVATION COMMISSION Local Designation Cornell heights TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 At the regular monthly meeting held on August 14, 1989, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determined by unanimous vote that those portions of the proposed Cornell Heights National Register District located within the city limits meet crite-ria for local designation as stipulated in Section 32.3(3) of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Ordinance. By this action, the Commission recommends to the Common Council local historic district designation. See appendix Items 1 and 2 for a map and address list of the 131 affected properties. The Commission's vote followed a public hearing at which eleven property owners and representatives spoke in favor of designation and six property owners and representatives spoke against designation In addition the Commission Chairperson read written comments in favor of local designation.from three property owners and written comments against local designation from three property owners. Prior to the vote recommending local designation, the Commission, as lead agency for the environmental review in accordance with Section 32.6 1 of Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, determined by unanimous vote that•the designation will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment. This action constitutes a negative declaration and terminates the environmental review. The Commission based its decision that Cornell Heights meets the criteria for local designation on findings of historic and architectural significance put forward by the New York State Office of Parks Recreation and historic Preservation (also the designated state historic preservation office SHPO), the New York State Committee on the Registers, and New York State Commissioner of Parks Recreation and historic Preservation, Orin Lehman. These findings, as prepared by the SHPO and presented to the Committee on the Registers at .the hearing held in. Albany on June 24, 1989 are item 3 of the appendix. EXHIBIT "B" Local Designation _2_ Cornell Heights Data supporting the Commission's recommendation for local designation was collected in the spring of 1987 during survey work undertaken with a Certified Local Government Subgrant from the SIIPO. Survey work and preparation of the National Register nomination were carried out by a 32 CFR Part 61 qualified consultant as identified in the Secretary.of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation. These qualifications define the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration and treatment activities. The survey consultant, Department of Planning and Development staff and SHPO staff worked closely throughout the survey and preparation of the nomination to evaluate survey data and establish the existing boundaries for the survey area. The Commission plans to forward its recommendation for local designation to the Common Council for consideration at the meeting to be held on September.6, 1989._ This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 36.6c of the Ithaca Landmarkt Preservation Ordinance, wherein it is stated that the Commission "shall file a copy of the designation with the Planning Board and with Common Council". August 21, 1989 0 -LC -I.oca 1Des. Cllt Appendix Iter► 1 Cornell Heights Local Historic District Map f i Appendix Item 2 Cornell Heights Local historic District Property List 1. 109 Barton Place 2. 104 Brook Land 3. 109 Dearborn Place 4. 116 Dearborn Place 5. 202 Dearborn Place 6. 208 Dearborn Place 7. 213 Dearborn Place 8. 215 Dearborn Place 9. 216 Dearborn Place 10. 1 Edgecliff Place 11. 101 Edgecliff Place 12. 112 Edgecliff Place 13. 202 Fall Creek Drive 14. 209-11 Fall Creek Drive 15. 212 Fall Creek Drive 16. 216 Fall Creek Drive 17. 218 Fall Creek Drive 18. 220 Fall Creek Drive 19. 225 Fall Creek Drive 20. 302 Fall Creek Drive 21. 310 Fall Creek Drive 22. 316 Fall Creek Drive 23. 326 Fall Creek Drive 24. 110-12 Heights Court 25. 111-13 Heights Court 26. 114 Heights Court 27. 115 heights Court 28. 116-16} heights Court 29. 118 heights Court 30. 119 heights Court 31. 120 heights Court 32. 121 heights Court 33. 123 heights Court 34. 125 heights Court 35. 106 highland Avenue 36. 110 highland Avenue 37. 150 highland Avenue 38. 200 highland Avenue 39. 201 highland Avenue 40. 203 highland Avenue 41. 111 Kelvin Place 42. 114 Kelvin Place 43. 115 Kelvin Place 116 Kelvin Place 45. 121 Kelvin Place 46. 125 Kelvin Place 47. 126 Kelvin Place 48. 210 Kelvin Place 49. 212 Kelvin Place 50. 1 Lodgeway 51. 5 Lodgeway 52. 6-6i Lodgeway 53. 8 Lodgeway 54. 10 Lodgeway 55. 105 Needham Place 56. 2 Ridgewood Road 57. 40 Ridgewood Road 58. 55 Ridgewood Road 59. 100 Ridgewood Road 60. 115 Ridgewood Road 61. 122 Roberts Place 62. 123 Roberts Place 63. 124 Roberts Place` 64. 900 Stewart Avenue 65. 916 Stewart Avenue 66. 934 Stewart Avenue 67. 1022 Stewart Avenue 68. 1024.Stewart Avenue 69. 102 The Knoll 70. 106 The Knoll 71. 111 The Knoll 72. 115 The Knoll 73. 115} The Knoll 74. 119 The Knoll 75. 101 Thurston Avenue 76. 117 Thurston Avenue 77. 119 Thurston Avenue 78. 121 Thurston Avenue 79. 140 Thurston Avenue 80. 201 Thurston. Avenue 81. 205 Thurston Avenue 82. 210 Thurston Avenue 83. 214 Thurston Avenue 84. 223 Thurston Avenue 85. 305 Thurston Avenue 86. 312 Thurston Avenue 87. 315 Thurston Avenue 88. 401 Thurston Avenue 89. 410 Thurston Avenue 90. 4111 Thurston Avenue 91. 504 Thurston Avenue 92. 508 Thurston Avenue 93. 520-22 Thurston Avenue 94. 534 Thurston Avenue 95. 536 Thurston Avenue 96 102 Triphammer Road Appendix Item 2 Cornell heights local historic District Property 97. 109 Triphammer Road 98. 110 Triphammer Road 99. 117 Triphammer Road 100. 118 Triphammer Road 101. 124 Triphammer Road 102. 150 Triphammer Road 103. 118 Wait Avenue 104. 120 Wait Avenue 105. 122 Wait Avenue 106. 208 Wait Avenue 107. 209 Wait Avenue 108. 214 Wait Avenue 109. 216 Wait Avenue 110. 218 Wait Avenue 111. 222 Wait Avenue 112. 228 Wait Avenue 113. 230 Wait Avenue 114. 302 Wait Avenue 115. 307 Wait Avenue 116. 308 Wait Avenue 117. 313 Wait Avenue 118. 319 Wait Avenue 119. 105 Westbourne Lane 120. 110 Westbourne Lane 121. 116 Westbourne Lane 122. 126 Westbourne Lane 123. 20111 Wyckoff Avenue 124. 203 Wyckoff Avenue 125. 205 Wyckoff Avenue 126. 301 Wyckoff Avenue 127. 303-05 Wyckoff Avenue 128. 403 Wyckoff Avenue 129. 419 Wyckoff Avenue 130. 425 Wyckoff Avenue 131. 435 Wyckoff Avenue Appendix Item 3 Cornell Iletghts Local Designation historic and Architectural 'Significance Tompkins._ county Cornell, Heights llistorlc•District, Ithaca I?eriod of Significance: 1898-1937 Areas of Significance: Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Community Planning Level of Significance: Local Proposal: The Cornell Iieights Historic District is architecturally and historically significant as an exceptional intact example of a turn -of -the -century planned residential suburban development placed in. an outstanding natural setting along the northern rim of Fall Creek Gorge overlooking the city of Ithaca and the southern tip of Cayuga Lake. The district's curvilinear street plan, lavish landscape features, dramatic geographical setting, strictly residential character (developed on large private lots) and its historical pattern of development place it within the • romantic tradition of the "ideal" residence park developed in the second half of the nineteenth century and popularized by Frederick Law Olmsted after the Civil War. This idea gained its' greatest momentum in the period after World War I, as the upper middle class sought to retreat from the pressures of the modern industrialized city. The pattern of development here, distinguished by an association with a single land company that employed the services of landscape architect (William Webster of Rochester) and financed virtually every aspect of physical improvement in the subdivision, though not unique, was unusual in an era in which trolley suburbs.along the barren fringes of large cities were being mass produced on rectilinear street plans by hundreds of speculators, contractors, and private property - owners. Cornell Heights was promoted by its owners ,as a high- class residential suburb and it evolved in that fashion. Homes, both modest and grand, were erected here between the years 1898 and .1937. They were all built to individualized designs and several represent the work of Ithaca's foremost turn-of-the- c!e'nt-ury architects, including William II. Miller.. A further dimension of significance stems from the intimate relationship between Cornell.11eights and Cornell University. The impetus toward development of the subdivision.was closely linked to Cornell university's major expansion around the turn -of -the - century, a program that had a tremendous effect on the small village of Ithaca and sparked its growth into its present size and character. At its inception, Cornell Heights was. considered an "addition" or suburb of Cornell University itself and it served as Home for many of the university's professors and :;t.udents;. Some of the leading figures n the early -twentieth t:t'ittur.y of the university resided in Cornell Heights and faculty moml)ers: of national and international ,renown continue to make ('(,i nel1 Iieights their home today. Retaining a high level of integrity, the Cornell. Heights Historic District illustrates an Important tant. aspect of American planning and recalls a significant 10.1 i (ul in the history of Ithaca. Check Applicable Bo Check Applicable Boz STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: I, the undersigned, am an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, and ❑ certify that the annexed Attorney's has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy thereof. Certification ❑ say that: I am the attorney of record, or of counsel with the attorney(s) of record, for Attorney'. . I have read the annexed Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be by alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein Affirmation not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: The reason I make this affirmation instead of is I affirm that the foregoing statements are true under penalties of perjury. Dated: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: being sworn says: I am (Print signet's name below signature) ❑ in the action herein; I have read the annexed Individual know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be Verification alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. 9 the of Corporate a corporation, one of the parties to the action; I have read the annexed Verification know the contents thereof and the same are true to my knowledge, except those matters therein which are stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. My belief, as to those matters therein not stated upon knowledge, is based upon the following: Sworn to before me on , 19 (Ptint signer's name below signature) STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss: age and reside at being sworn says: Iam not a party to the action, am over 18 years of On , 19 , I served a true copy of the annexed in the following manner: ❑ by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post•off'ice or official depository of the U.S. By rMa;; vice Postal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressee(s) as indicated below: • by delivering the same personally to the persons and at the addresses indicated below: • Persona: Service Sworn to before me on , 19 1> (Print signer's name below signature) Sir: Take notice of an of which the within is a copy, duly granted in the within entitled action, on the day of , 19 , and duly entered iii the office of the Clerk of the County of on the day of 19 Dated , N.Y., 19 HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 ' P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 To Attorney for .Ian.Ias jo ainiEudis sup `auI a.ropq o; moms 0 . , . r. °0m o o E P CD n n o S 0000❑ `, a. ,< c 0 z_ 5 yr° e c„ o QQ V] _X � o (D �"'o 7 CD 0. -1 a 0000❑ 77 n CC CO a1 v, 21, .i,,,0 o t'Er 0 Z ,<,• 0' 0 " 5 r-"1 " 4' o• 0' 0" a. 5• 0 E p p W 0. `< F. G 0 0 in w a co ry. 0a. Cu oa N w 0000❑ o < 9 ;_ Cr 0 0 6) OCR w t� eG - cn CJl O fn 0 EryG-ryC11.1 b 0. .n 0 -, F.., 0 ❑0000 fJ < .A O O 0, " a) cn cn " -oaocacn 0000❑ " L3,-, —0 ts0 Cb "al0 0 1 0 0 r- 0 0 0' • < m 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn 0 0 deponent served the within aq; uo NUJ Cr oa 0. 0 n co 0 0 0 a. G" T 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 w 0 o° 0 STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF 0 0 y 0 1 CO 0 m 0 -n 00 0 c: 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PERSONAL SERVICE INDEX NO. 89-815 YEAR 19 RJI No. 89-0545 J. Rose STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT County of TOMPKINS CARL SAGAN and ANN DRUYAN, Petitioners vs. SUZANNE LICHTENSTEIN, ET AL., Respondents Copy NOTICE OF AMENDED PETITION & AMENDED PETITION HOLMBERG, GALBRAITH, HOLMBERG, ORKIN & BENNETT Attorneys for Petitioners Office and Post Office Address 200 East Buffalo Street Suite 502 P. 0. Box 6599 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14851 - TELEPHONE: 273-5475 AREA CODE: 607 Due and personal service of the within is admitted this day of 19 Attorney for .Ian.Ias jo ainiEudis sup `auI a.ropq o; moms 0 . , . r. °0m o o E P CD n n o S 0000❑ `, a. ,< c 0 z_ 5 yr° e c„ o QQ V] _X � o (D �"'o 7 CD 0. -1 a 0000❑ 77 n CC CO a1 v, 21, .i,,,0 o t'Er 0 Z ,<,• 0' 0 " 5 r-"1 " 4' o• 0' 0" a. 5• 0 E p p W 0. `< F. G 0 0 in w a co ry. 0a. Cu oa N w 0000❑ o < 9 ;_ Cr 0 0 6) OCR w t� eG - cn CJl O fn 0 EryG-ryC11.1 b 0. .n 0 -, F.., 0 ❑0000 fJ < .A O O 0, " a) cn cn " -oaocacn 0000❑ " L3,-, —0 ts0 Cb "al0 0 1 0 0 r- 0 0 0' • < m 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn 0 0 deponent served the within aq; uo NUJ Cr oa 0. 0 n co 0 0 0 a. G" T 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :0 w 0 o° 0 STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF 0 0 y 0 1 CO 0 m 0 -n 00 0 c: 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PERSONAL SERVICE