Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2020-01-28Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 1 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) Minutes — January 28, 2020 Present: Ed Finegan, Chair David Kramer, Vice Chair Stephen Gibian, Member Susan Stein, Member Donna Fleming, Common Council Liaison Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner Absent: Katelin Olson, Member Avi Smith, Member Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 115 Llenroc Court, University Hill Historic District – Proposal to install a six-over- six, wood-sash window in the south wall of the one-story enclosed porch on the west elevation. Steve Burun, site manager for Ashley Management (on behalf of Cornell University Real Estate), appeared in front of the Commission. Maria Maynard, also of Ashley Management, was available via telephone to answer questions as well. S. Burun said their project has been reviewed by the Building Division and the Fire Department and a building permit has been issued, pending the approval from the ILPC. He said they are proposing two options for the window, one with true divided lights, and one with simulated divided lights. He said one model was wood on both sides, and the other one had wood on the inside and fiberglass on the outside. He shared some photos with the Commission. D. Kramer asked if the proposal is to install one window or two. S. Burun said one, but he is presenting both options. He said both are six-over-six double hung. S. Stein asked if the window will be going in where there is not currently a window. S. Burun said yes. It would be to allow for egress. He said that the house was recently renovated and a sprinkler system was installed. He said the apartment is currently compliant for two residents, and they want to add a bedroom to allow a third resident. S. Gibian asked if these are the same windows as were proposed originally. M. Maynard said no, the windows originally submitted did not have a divider option available. The new ones do. Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 2 S. Gibian said it looks like one’s a wood window with authentic divided lights, and the other is a SDL clad in fiberglass. S. Burun said yes, the Elevate is the fiberglass clad with SDL, and the Ultimate is a single pane all pine with divided lights. D. Fleming asked if everyone is okay with the proposal to add a window in a location where there wasn’t one before. No one objected. Public Hearing On a motion by S. Stein, seconded by A. Smith, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing. There being no members of the public appearing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed the Public Hearing on a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein. D. Kramer said it’s going to be on the back of the house, six-over-six, either true divided light or simulated. He asked the Commission members how much they care. B. McCracken said the side of the building where the window is proposed was historically and is architecturally the primary façade. For address purposes, it is no longer. He said that what’s proposed matches the existing windows in size and detailing as closely as possible, given that it’s a modern window. He said that this area was previously a porch that was enclosed at some point, so it’s not modifying a feature that was historically significant. He said the addition of this window, in his opinion, will not significantly alter the overall architecture of the building or alter the historic character of the property, so the biggest issue here is deciding which window product is the most appropriate. S. Stein said she likes the Ultimate window. S. Gibian said that it’s proposed to have primed pine brick mold casing on the exterior. He said the existing casings on the other windows on the house are 5/4 by 4-1/2 inches. What’s proposed will have basically no sill, and that’s an issue. He said the existing windows use the eave casing as their head casing. They only have side casings and then a nice big sill. He said that he would try to mimic that look. He said a brick mold casing wouldn’t match, and he thinks the wide muntins to cover the insulated glazing seals is a bad look. Chair E. Finegan asked if he would prefer the simulated divided light option. S. Gibian said yes. He said he’s concerned about the width of the muntins. B. McCracken asked for clarification on the drawing labeled “A20.” He asked if the intent is to Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 3 install trim to match the existing or just go with the stock trim. M. Maynard said the trim will match the existing as closely as possible. S. Gibian said that in that case, they will want to order (if they go with the wood option) without casing and field case it. B. McCracken said it sounds like size isn’t the issue, but rather it is replicating the existing windows as closely as possible. S. Gibian said it would be nice if it could match the height, so it would align with the siding the same. B. McCracken asked about the size. M. Maynard said that the existing are 34-by-66 inches, and what’s proposed will be 38-by-66, and they will match the sill and trim as closely as possible, but it won’t have any shutters. S. Gibian said the measurements she is providing for the existing windows are the sash opening, but for the new one it’s the frame or the rough opening. He said he’s okay with it, but he wants the applicant to be aware and order it right. He said it also looks like the provided drawings show brick mold on all four sides, not 5/4” casing. B. McCracken asked if there are conditions the Commission members would like to add to the resolution requiring the applicant to match the sill and trim while allowing them to use one of the proposed windows. He also asked if they want to require it align with the porch header like the rest. Commission members agreed. After some additional discussion, the Commission recommended going with the SDL option because it would more closely match the muntin width of the historic windows. They also specified that it be field applied trim and sill to match the look of the existing windows. RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein. WHEREAS, 115 Llenroc Court is located within the University Hill Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 2003, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, dated January 14, 2020, was submitted for review to the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Maria Maynard on behalf of property owner Cornell University Real Estate, including the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); (2) two sheets of architectural drawings, revisions dated January 13, 2020, drafted by Kingsbury Architecture, LLC, and titled “South Elevation, Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 4 Addendum 4” (A-20) and “Basement and First Floor Plans” (ADD-4-A1); and (3) product information for a Marvin brand window, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the entry in the annotated list of properties included within the University Hill Historic District for 115 Llenroc Court, and the City of Ithaca’s University Hill Historic District Summary Statement, and WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves the installation of a six-over-six, aluminum-clad, double-hung, wood window in the south wall of the one-story enclosed porch on the west elevation, and WHEREAS, the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing for the purpose of considering approval of the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on January 28, 2020, now therefore be it RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The period of significance for the area now known as the University Hill Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca’s University Hill Historic District Summary Significance Statement as 1867-1927. As indicated in the entry in the annotated list of properties included within the University Hill Historic District, 115 Llenroc Court was constructed in 1927 by Robert H. Treman as a wedding present for his son and daughter-in-law, Allan H. Treman and Ellen Frances Barton, respectively. It is architecturally significant as a highly intact example of a Dutch Colonial Revival Style residence. Constructed within the period of significance of the University Hill Historic District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing element of the University Hill Historic District. The proposed window is needed to meet egress requirements established by the International Building Code for the conversion of a living space into a bedroom. In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new construction, or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC must determine that the proposed exterior work will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance and value of either the landmark or, if the improvement is within a district, of the neighboring improvements in such district. In considering architectural and cultural Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 5 value, the Commission shall consider whether the proposed change is consistent with the historic value and the spirit of the architectural style of the landmark or district in accordance with Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code. In making this determination, the Commission is guided by the principles set forth in Section 228-6B of the Municipal Code, as further elaborated in Section 228-6C, and by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and in this case specifically the following principles and Standards: Principle #2 The historic features of a property located within, and contributing to the significance of, an historic district shall be altered as little as possible and any alterations made shall be compatible with both the historic character of the individual property and the character of the district as a whole. Standard #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property will be avoided. Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2, and Standard #9, the installation of a new window will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter features and spaces that characterize the property. Also with respect to Principle #2, and Standard #9, a six-over-six, double-hung window is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property and its environment. RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the University Hill Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be it further, RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions:  A Marvin “Elevate” Fiberglass window matching the attached specifications shall be installed. Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 6  The new window shall be trimmed to match the existing six-over-six windows in the property. The head casing shall be the frieze of the enclosed porch; the side casings shall be a 5/4” solid wood material matching the width of window side casings found elsewhere on the property; and a sill matching the size, shape, and slope of others found on the property shall be field-applied. RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: D. Kramer Seconded by: S. Stein In Favor: S. Stein, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, S. Gibian Against: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: K. Olson, A. Smith Vacancies: 1 Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner’s representative to bring to the attention of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans, including but not limited to changes required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop work order or revocation of the building permit. II. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS  Dewitt Park Treelawn Discussion B. McCracken asked if the Commission wanted to review the DPW’s plan to install stamped concrete in the treelawn along Buffalo Street, similar to what they had done previously along Cayuga Street. The Commission members indicated they would like to see the proposal before the City does the work. B. McCracken said he would inform Mark Verbanic that he should return to the ILPC for further approvals before proceeding with the project. III. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST Chair E. Finegan next opened the public comment period. Satre Stuelke of 101 N. Aurora Street, friend of D. Kramer and Chair E. Finegan, introduced himself to the ILPC members, told them a little about himself, and expressed an interest in the Commission’s work. There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed the public comment period. Approved by ILPC: 19, March 2019 7 IV. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission