Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2021-06-15Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 1 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) Regular Monthly Meeting Minutes — June 15, 2021 Present: Ed Finegan, Chair David Kramer, Vice Chair Stephen Gibian, Member Katelin Olson, Member Susan Stein, Member Donna Fleming, Common Council Liaison Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner and ILPC Secretary Anya Harris, City of Ithaca staff Absent: Avi Smith, Member Pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order 202.1, this meeting was conducted remotely via the online meeting platform Zoom. Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Olin Library, 161 Ho Plaza, Cornell Arts Quad Historic District – Proposal to Construction of a New Entrance on the North Elevation, Including the Installation of Aluminum Entry Doors in the First Story, a Concrete Terrace, Granite Benches, and New Signage. Cornell University Architect J. Shermeta and Jon Ladley from the library administrative services division appeared in front of the Commission to present a proposal to install a new permanent door in the place of a temporary door installed during the pandemic. D. Fleming asked if the doors enter into the café or the reading room. J Shermeta said they enter into the reading room. D. Fleming said that having the door clang would be disruptive. J. Shermeta said the door would have a closer on it so it wouldn’t be able to slam closed and also that this section of the reading room would be cleared of seating and used for circulation of foot traffic. K. Olson asked why it wouldn’t match the main door. J. Shermeta said that the main door is a champagne color material with a brass light fixture that is very showy, but they wanted this secondary entrance to fade into the background. Chair E. Finegan asked about the trails going up to the door and if they would be changed again. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 2 J. Shermeta said that that remains to be seen, but hopefully they will stay on the main paths. S. Gibian asked if they can realistically fit in between the wooden mulleins. He said it seems tight, and he wonders if they will be able to fit it in. S. Gibian expressed a preference for sliding the door in between the mullions, as opposed to incorporating them into the new vestibule. J. Shermetta said that’s their preference as well. Public Hearing On a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein, Chair E. Finegan opened the public hearing. There being no members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, and no written comments submitted to be read aloud, Chair E. Finegan closed the public hearing on a motion by D. Kramer and seconded by S. Stein. S. Gibian said that initially he wondered why the door was not centered on the concrete columns, but he now understands why they wouldn’t want to have people entering right through the middle of the reading room. K. Olson said that she knows it’s not germane to the project at hand, but she thinks it’s a shame that the building is not recognized as a contributing resource. D. Kramer aid that he understands her concerns, but given that it’s not a contributing resource, and that the new door isn’t going to be highly visible, he doesn’t have a problem with it. S. Gibian said he disagrees, and he thinks it is the main façade because it faces the Arts Quad. K. Olson agreed. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 3 Resolution: Moved by S. Stein, seconded by D. Kramer WHEREAS, Olin Library, 161 Ho Plaza, is located within the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 1990, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, dated May 26, 2021 , was submitted for review to the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by J. Shermeta on behalf of property owner Cornell University, including the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); and three sheets of design drawings, dated June 27, 2021, and titled “Cover Sheet” (CS), “New Work Floor Plan & Exterior Elevation” (A101), and “New Work Interior Section & Rendering” (A201), and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for Olin Library, 161 Ho Plaza, and the City of Ithaca’s Cornell Arts Quad Historic District Summary Statement, and WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves the installation of an aluminum entrance door, the construction of a concrete terrace, and the placement of two granite benches at the third bay east from the northwest corner of the first story of the north 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 June 15, 2021, 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 Cornell Arts Quad is identified in the City of Ithaca’s Cornell Arts Quad Historic District Summary Significance Statement as 1868-1919. As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, Olin Library, 161 Ho Plaza, was constructed to replace Boardman Hall in 1960 and is considered a non-contributing resource within the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 4 Although it was constructed outside of the period of significance and is considered a non-contributing resource, the architect-designed Olin Library is now over fifty years old and is likely eligible for individual listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Designed by the architecture firm of Warner, Burns, Toan, and Lunde, the building reflects the high visual and material quality of the contributing buildings within the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District. The rusticated, random ashlar base replicates the wall treatment of Boardman Hall (demolished, 1958) and complements the stonework of Stimson Hall and Uris Library; the design of the lead-coated copper, mansard roof echoes the roof cladding of McGraw Tower; and the regularized and vertically oriented fenestration reflects the traditional configuration and proportions of windows in the surrounding historic buildings. In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new construction, or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC must determine that the proposed exterior work will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance and value of either the landmark or, if the improvement is within a district, of the neighboring improvements in such district. In considering architectural and cultural value, the Commission shall consider whether the proposed change is consistent with the historic value and the spirit of the architectural style of the landmark or district in accordance with Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code. In making this determination, the Commission is guided by the principles set forth in Section 228-6B of the Municipal Code, as further elaborated in Section 228-6C, and by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and in this case specifically the following principles and Standards: 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. As a non-contributing structure, Olin Library, 161 Ho Plaza, by definition, does not possess historic materials or features that are subject to protection under the Principles enumerated in Section 228-5 of the Municipal Code or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. The ILPC’s evaluation of the proposed work is therefore limited to the assessment of the impact of the proposed work on adjacent historic structures in the district and on the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District as a whole, with the guiding principle being that the proposed work must not further reduce the compatibility of the non-contributing structure with its historic environment. With respect to Standard #9, the proposed entrance, terrace and benches are compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features of their historic environment. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 5 RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the Cornell Arts Quad 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. RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: S. Stein Seconded by: D. Kramer In Favor: S. Stein, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, S. Gibian Against: K. Olson Abstain: 0 Absent: 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. B. East Hill Historic District Expansion – Nomination to Expand the Boundary of the Local East Hill Historic District to Include Properties at 309, 313, 315-317, 319, 321, 401, 403,405, and 407 North Aurora Street, 308, 309, 310, 313, 315-17, 316, and 319 East Court Street, and 101, 106, and 108 Linn Street. B. McCracken provided a brief overview of the proposal to expand the East Hill Historic District, the properties in question, and the rationale behind it. D. Fleming asked for a response to property owners who claim this is an undue burden and/or an unjust restriction of their rights as property owners. B. McCracken said that there are several property owners in the expansion area who have expressed support, but to those who think it would present a hardship, he would remind them that approvals are only needed for exterior changes to a locally-designated property. Further, designation opens up opportunities to take advantage of tax abatements and tax credits. Chair E. Finegan asked about impacts on property values. K. Olson said historic districts tend to keep property values up. Historic designations tend to Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 6 stabilize property values in neighborhoods, and in fact, claims of gentrification sometimes follow designations. She also said that in-kind replacements don’t require Commission approvals. D. Fleming asked why these 19 houses were not included in the original district. B. McCracken said that he’s not sure, but his contacts in the State Historic Preservation Office indicated that in the early era of preservation in the ‘70s, it was common that if even one property owner objected, the preservationists would walk away. D. Fleming asked if any of the properties would be non-contributing. B. McCracken said no. Public Hearing On a motion by S. Gibian, seconded by S. Stein, Chair E. Finegan opened the public hearing. Micah Beck read from a prepared statement that has been included as an addendum to these minutes. Joch & Kirby comments were read into the record and are included as an addendum to these minutes. There being no more members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, and no additional written comments submitted to be read aloud, Chair E. Finegan closed the public hearing on a motion by D. Kramer and seconded by S. Stein. D. Fleming expressed concerns about the criteria being applied to the properties proposed for designation not being strong enough, and perhaps might apply to other blocks in Fall Creek, Belle Sherman or Bryant Park. B. McCracken said that what’s significant about this particular group of properties is their high level of architectural integrity, particularly the Italianates, which have not changed much in the last 150 years. He said that can’t be said for many in the City. He said the part of the discussion about designation that frequently gets left out is the retention of historic fabric. Other houses may have had historic connections to prominent local residents but have been significantly altered over time. Here, they have not. S. Stein said that there are other areas that are worthy of designation, but with limited time and money, the Commission has not gotten to them. Much of the groundwork for this designation was completed previously, so expanding the EHHD to include these properties is Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 7 something the Commission can reasonably take up at this time. D. Kramer said that as for cohesiveness, turning from Aurora to E. Court Street, that row of Italianate and Second Empire houses is unique in the City. There’s nothing else like it. He said that this group of houses should have been included in the EHHD a long time ago. Resolution: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson. WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission may recommend the designation of landmarks and districts of historic and cultural significance, and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been concluded for the purpose of considering a proposal to expand the existing East Hill Historic District to include 19 properties along North Aurora, East Court, and Linn Streets that are not currently included within the district, the boundaries of which are shown on the attached map, and WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines a HISTORIC DISTRICT as follows: A group of properties which: 1. Contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as an individual landmark; and 2. Constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of possessing those qualities that would satisfy such criteria. and, WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines the criteria for designation of an individual landmark as follows: 1. Possessing special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or 2. Being identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or 3. Embodying the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or 4. Being the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or 5. Representing an established and familiar visual feature of the community by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 8 and, WHEREAS, the Commission has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposed designation: Two portions of the East Hill neighborhood were first designated as local historic districts in 1974 (the Fountain Place Historic District) and 1976 (the East Hill Historic District). In 1986, the much larger present-day East Hill Historic District was surveyed and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1988, the boundaries of the local East Hill Historic District were expanded to match those of the National Register District, subsuming the two earlier local districts. The local East Hill Historic District was expanded again in 2014 to include seven properties located along Orchard Place that were inappropriately excluded from the district established in 1986. The period of significance for the East Hill Historic District is 1830-1932. The district derives its greatest significance from the broad collection of architecturally and historically significant 19th and early 20th century residential, commercial, and institutional buildings contained within it. The district includes many of Ithaca’s best and most intact examples of popular American architectural styles and modes, including Greek Revival, Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Shingle, Queen Anne, Renaissance Revival, Colonial Revival, and Arts and Crafts (or Craftsman). The architectural styles employed reflect the neighborhood’s prestige and influence and the prominence Ithaca gained after the founding of Cornell University and the New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Constructed roughly between the 1830s and 1930s, this building stock reflects Ithaca’s growth from a small industrial community to its 20th century role as an internationally known, distinguished educational center. The significance of the North Aurora, East Court and Linn Street properties is consistent with that of the East Hill Historic District as a whole; however, these resources were excluded from the original district nomination by the arbitrarily drawn western boundary line. In keeping with Section 228-3 C.1 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the North Aurora, East Court, and Linn Street properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more appropriately and completely define “a distinct section of the city” that “contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as an individual landmark.” Per criterion #1 of Section 228-3 B, the Orchard Place properties possess a special character, historical interest, and aesthetic interest and value as part of the cultural, political, economic, and social history of the city. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 9 In coherence with the significance of the East Hill Historic District, the nineteen properties at 309, 313, 315-317, 319, 321, 401, 403, 405, and 407 North Aurora Street, 308, 309, 310, 313, 315-17, 316, and 319 East Court Street, and 101, 106, and 108 Linn Street are significant for their association with the residential growth of East Hill during the 19th and early-20th centuries. Important themes and features from the original East Hill Historic District nomination reflected in the narratives for these properties include the establishment and expansion of Cornell University, speculative real estate development, designs by prominent local architects, and the growth of Ithaca from a small rural village to an internationally recognized city. Per criterion #3 of Section 228-3 B, the proposed expansion area is also significant as a collection of nineteenth and early-twentieth century houses embodying the distinguishing characteristics of the popular architectural styles of the era, including Craftsman and Colonial Revival. Most of the properties within the proposed expansion area are excellent representations of high-style and vernacular interpretations of popular 19th and early-20th century American architectural styles, including Greek Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, Stick, and Craftsman styles. Of particular note in the proposed expansion area are the incredible collection of Italianate residences, including 309, 315-17, and 319 East Court Street, and 309 and 407 North Aurora Street; a highly intact, high- style example of the Second Empire style at 313 East Court Street; and the Queen Anne style residence at 313 North Aurora Street. Many properties in the expansion area gain additional architectural significance as examples of the works of locally prominent architects, including William Henry Miller (313 North Aurora St. and 316 East Court Street), Alvah B. Wood (313 North Aurora), Alfred B. Dale (315-317 and 319 East Court Street), and John M. Wilgus (321 North Aurora Street). In keeping with Section 228-3 C.2 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the Orchard Place properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more appropriately define an area that constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of possessing those qualities that would satisfy the criteria for designation as an individual landmark. The western boundary of the existing East Hill National Register district was established along an arbitrary line running diagonally through the block formed by East Buffalo Street, North Aurora Street, East Court Street, and Terrace Place, and has no apparent connection to historic or existing geographic, political or real estate development patterns or features. It creates an inappropriate artificial distinction between the resources within the district and those located in the proposed expansion area. Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 10 The boundary of the proposed expansion area, as represented in the attached map, regularizes and provides a sound geographic and historical justification for the western boundary of the historic district. In general, it is bounded on the west by east curb line of the 300 and 400 blocks of North Aurora Street and on the north by the south rim of Cascadilla Creek. Treman Triangle Park was excluded from the survey area due to its association with the developed of Cascadilla Park Road during the late 19th and early-20 century. The properties on the west side of the 300 and 400 blocks of North Aurora Street were also excluded from the survey area as their stylistic expression and use more closely relate to the architectural and historical significance of the properties within the DeWitt Park Historic District. And, WHEREAS, the Commission adopts as its own the documentation and information, including a revised Statement of Significance for the East Hill Historic District and Historic Structure Inventory Forms for the properties at 309, 313, 315-317, 319, 321, 401, 403,4 05, and 407 North Aurora Street, 308, 309, 310, 313, 315-17, 316, and 319 East Court Street, and 101, 106, and 108 Linn Street, prepared by Secretary to the Commission, Bryan McCracken, based upon materials submitted to the ILPC in 2019 by Christian O’Malley and Olivia Heckendorf of Historic Ithaca, Inc, with Mary Raddant Tomlan, City Historian, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that 309, 313, 315- 317, 319, 321, 401, 403, 405, and 407 North Aurora Street, 308, 309, 310, 313, 315- 17, 316, and 319 East Court Street, and 101, 106, and 108 Linn Street meet criteria for inclusion within the local East Hill Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby recommends expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include at 309, 313, 315-317, 319, 321, 401, 403, 405, and 407 North Aurora Street, 308, 309, 310, 313, 315-17, 316, and 319 East Court Street, and 101, 106, and 108 Linn Street, altering the western boundary of the local historic district as shown on the attached map. RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: D. Kramer Seconded by: K. Olson In Favor: E. Finegan, S. Gibian D. Kramer, K. Olson, S. Stein, Against: None Abstain: None Absent: A. Smith Vacancies: One Approved by ILPC: 17, August 2021 11 II. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST Chair E. Finegan opened the meeting to public comments. There being no members of the public appearing and wishing to speak, and no written comments submitted to be read aloud, Chair E. Finegan closed the public comment period. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • The March 16, 2021 minutes of the City-Town Historic Preservation Working Group meeting were approved unanimously, with the condition that S. Gibian’s written corrections of typographical errors would be made. VII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bryan McCracken Secretary Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission To the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission  15 June, 2021    I would like to address some issues I have with the proposed expansion of the East Hill Historic District.   My name is Micah Beck and my brother and I are the members of Johnson Apartments, LLC, which owns  321 North Aurora Street.  We are the third generation of our family to own the building and together  that constitutes roughly thirty percent of its life.  In the abstract for the tax parcel, there is no one who  approaches that number of years, and so I feel that we have some authority to speak to the history of  the place.  To begin, I have strong misgivings about the reasons put forth for the expansion of this district during  the public information session that was held on 1 April, 2021.  The two main focus points seemed to be:  1) that the line of the current district was messy and didn’t come to crisp right angles with  street corners, and  2) that the buildings were old and that various people had been living in them for a while.  I did not hear of any consistent architectural value beyond a few individual cases.  Indeed, our own  property is essentially a mere rectangle clad in aluminum siding.  Further, I do not consider that the  individuals who once lived in these properties constitute a group of great historical interest, nor do I  think that such a consideration should carry any weight unless the personage is overwhelming.  Yes, Ezra  Cornell’s name is on the abstract for our building for a space of a few years, but there is grave doubt  that he ever lived there, even according to what I heard from the findings of the relevant historic  resource survey in the summer of 2018.    So, without the force of any other historical considerations of which I am aware, let me address the two  points which I understood to be the drivers of this proposed expansion.    In the first case, that the district as currently constituted is somehow incomplete and that New York  State historical preservation bodies like things to be neat, I find no force.  It does not interest me what  makes such a body’s job easier or crisper or cleaner if there is no benefit other than that, nor do I think  it should be a guiding principle in what any given owner does with their property.  In the second argument, I find more meat, but will still dispute it.  The information on our building  presented in the session on 1 April, 2021 stated that the building has nearly always been a boarding  house for students and it continues in a similar vein after having been split into six apartments some  decades ago.  So, is this historic?  Is it worthy of being preserved in some way other than by  documentation?  Neither.  To quote Murray Bookchin’s Ecology of Freedom: “Acts do not constitute  institutions; episodes do not make a history.”  That people lived in any given building for a while and  that that building still stands is not history.  It is a series of facts that are already compiled elsewhere.  If  we were to designate all buildings of a similar age in which various people had been living, an enormous  part of the City of Ithaca would be one large historic district, in which people would live in places that  venerated generations they could not fathom and stifled their own lives by a too‐great worship of What  Came Before.  In conclusion, I would like to quote from Nietzsche’s little book called On the Advantage and  Disadvantage of History for Life.  “Cheerfulness, clear conscience, the carefree deed, faith in the future, all this depends, in the case of an  individual as well as of a people, on one’s being able to forget at the right time as well as to remember  at the right time; on discerning with strong instinctual feelings when there is need to experience  historically and when unhistorically.  Precisely this is the proposition the reader is invited to consider:  the unhistorical and the historical are equally necessary for the health of an individual, a people and a  culture.”  and further on,  “The antiquarian sense of a man, of an urban community, of a whole people always has an extremely  limited field of vision; it cannot apply a standard and so takes every thing to be equally important and  therefore each individual thing to be too important… Here there is always one danger very near: the  time will finally come when everything old and past which has not totally been lost sight of will simply  be taken as equally venerable”    Therefore, we, the members of Johnson Apartments, LLC, the owners of 321 North Aurora Street, do not  feel that the proposed expansion of the East Hill Historic District is needed or justified, and certainly not  in the case of our own building.  Worse, it seems to take history as its own force and to not be in the  service of life.  History should be for life, and not the other way around.  Please vote to NOT recommend  that Common Council designate the study area as part of the local East Hill Historic District.    Thank you for this opportunity to address this Commission.    Micah Beck    6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210607004.06 1/2 319 N. Aurora St. Joch & Kirby <jochnkirby@aol.com> Mon 6/14/2021 12:13 PM To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org> Dear Ms. Harris: I am writing to oppose the expansion of the East Hill Historic District. We are the owners of 319 N. Aurora St. Susan Kirby listened to the presentation as to why this District should be expanded to include this wedge. It was nonsensical. One of the statements made was "why not". That is not a reason. That is power grabbing. If you really want the building we are having it appraised and you are welcome to buy it from us. The buildings sought to be included are 90% owned by landlords as they were when constructed to be housing for Cornell Students. They were not built for any historically significant purpose. We were dumbfounded that the reason one of the buildings was being included was because it was where William Henry Miller rented as a student at Cornell. Our building was built specifically to house Cornell students by an adjoining landowner. It was not constructed to he historically significant and when discussing the significance of all the buildings to be included, our building was glossed over. As a landlord, to be included in the Historic District will have a chilling effect. Why would any of us seek to make repairs when we have to go through a committee that randomly demands changes to plans that are not historically significant. What we reference is that at the last meeting, a proposal was on the table to put new awnings over the Moosewood Restaurant. It was not only an onerous process to prepare that presentation, but after approved initially, one of the committee members piped up that they metal should be powder coated. This issue was then forced into the expenses in order to pass without consideration of the cost and more importantly, there was not powder coated metal at the time that those awnings were put up originally, so how was this protecting the Historic significance of that building? Is that what we are expected to do now? Again, this was a power issue What we are also very disturbed to hear was a hope that someday the interiors of the building would be subject to the committees approval. Power has gone to their heads. You might as well tear down the buildings that are already subject to Fire codes and City codes if you want to control the interiors. Unfortunately, you cannot tear down my building because it has asbestos siding, so it is not going to be repaired without the utmost care, but if the Historic Ithaca committee wants us to fix something that would disturb that asbestos, then they must be liable for the health issues related thereto. You are ostensibly taking control of our property while then asking us to subsidize at much higher and costs and the effort of a very small number of people on a committee. To be blunt, no one requested this, it offers no benefit to the community at large, no one wants this except for this small committee. Has there been any consideration of the legitimate housing crisis in the community and the effect that rubber stamping this changes to a large swathe of rental property will have on this housing crisis. Has there been any research at all on the resale value of our buildings? I have already offered to sell this to you - please accept this proposal. 6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210607004.06 2/2 Many of my neighbors have shabby properties we would like to see them improve but they are not going to do that if they have to seek permission from the Ithaca Historic Preservation Committee. I strongly oppose such inclusion in the East Hill Historic District because the committee feels "why not". Susan also wrote to all the Common Council members including the Mayor and no one even acknowledged her email. It shows that there is no real interest in the proposal and we ask that you do not approve it simply because a small committee wants power and control over a small number of your citizens at the citizen's expense. This is a taking. We would get paid if this were an eminent domain proceeding, which it is, while avoiding the legal process. We are considering our legal options and if need be, will bring it to court to protect our property interests. Joseph Joch, Esq. Joseph Kirby, Esq. Susan Kirby, Esq. Joch & Kirby 319 N. Aurora St. Ithaca, NY 14850 607-272-7279 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message may be legally privileged and contain confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (607-272- 7279), by fax (607-272-9976), or by return email, delete this message, and destroy any copies of print-outs of this message. Thank you. If you have not formally retained this firm for legal services, then we are not your attorneys and neither this communication nor any attachments hereto constitute the provision of legal services or the establishment or confirmation of an attorney-client relationship. Joch & Kirby 319 N. Aurora St. Ithaca, NY 14850 607-272-7279 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message may be legally privileged and contain confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (607-272- 7279), by fax (607-272-9976), or by return email, delete this message, and destroy any copies of print-outs of this message. Thank you. If you have not formally retained this firm for legal services, then we are not your attorneys and neither this communication nor any attachments hereto constitute the provision of legal services or the establishment or confirmation of an attorney-client relationship. 6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADcxOTc0NzI1LTA5YTMtNDI2YS05NDEzLWJkMDgyNTE4NGY5OQAQAOkIRgbu9YJDn96%2B%2BI8F…1/2 319 N. Aurora St. Joch & Kirby <jochnkirby@aol.com> Mon 6/14/2021 12:43 PM To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org> Dear Ms. Harris: My office just sent an email with our issues about being included in any historic district. I note you wanted permission to read it into the record and you have our permission. I just reviewed the description of the property and there are multiple errors which I suspect are in the other property descriptions as well. a. It states the property is accessible from both North Aurora St and Court St., If you mean that there are doors into the building, that is true, but there is not access for vehicles to this building except for a shared parking lot (not paved), off of Court Street. There is no handicap accessibility to this building and I am sure that Historic Ithaca will chime in if and when any renovations would be needed to add an elevator.Perhaps they want to have it powder coated at their expense? b. The parking lot is not paved. c. Only half the roof was improved in 2011. We could not afford the $25K to do the other half. Will Historic Ithaca get involved in that? How much are they going to contribute? d. The windows in the building should all be replaced but we cannot afford it. The result is higher energy costs. e. The porch on the rear apartment is visible and sits on the top of the garage. The person who wrote the report could easily see this but claims it is not visible. What else was missed. The one true part - this was and always has been a rooming house. No one with any importance to the history of Ithaca, had anything to do with this building. At no point does it mention the state of the building's need for repairs , It needs repairs but they will not be made if we are expected to seek the approval of a historic committee that has already proved to be more interested in modern aesthetic improvements whether or not it was historically accurate. I was told I could get grants at one point - exactly who has to do that work? Is Historic Ithaca going to do that work? Of course not. They are nothing but bullies. "Joch & Kirby - you can get grants, maybe, but that is your problem". Yes, please read this into the record. Susan C. Kirby,. Esq. Joch & Kirby 319 N. Aurora St. Ithaca, NY 14850 607-272-7279 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message may be legally privileged and contain confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, 6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADcxOTc0NzI1LTA5YTMtNDI2YS05NDEzLWJkMDgyNTE4NGY5OQAQAOkIRgbu9YJDn96%2B%2BI8F…2/2 you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (607-272- 7279), by fax (607-272-9976), or by return email, delete this message, and destroy any copies of print-outs of this message. Thank you. If you have not formally retained this firm for legal services, then we are not your attorneys and neither this communication nor any attachments hereto constitute the provision of legal services or the establishment or confirmation of an attorney-client relationship. 6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADcxOTc0NzI1LTA5YTMtNDI2YS05NDEzLWJkMDgyNTE4NGY5OQAQAC%2BbHdCkfUJItrJrpX2V86w…1/2 319 N. Aurora St. Joch & Kirby <jochnkirby@aol.com> Mon 6/14/2021 1:22 PM To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org> Dear Ms. Harris: Yes, this is a third email from this office. I reviewed Chapter 228 of the City Code, 228(3) and I find that nothing in that section applies to this building and very little of this wedge. None of the buildings possess special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state or nation. They were simply houses primarily built to house college students and represent a hodge-podge of design elements that have been changed throughout the years. If the location of the place William Henry Miller rented while in college is significant, then designate the entire City as historic including your homes, noting that some of you do not live in the City. None were identified as having historically significant person(s) or event(s) like the former Cornell Women's Rugby House at the corner of Seneca and Stewart where George Bush's grandfather died racking leaves. Again, the reliance on William Henry Miller is displaced as he had little to do with this wedge. All structures included several different distinguishing characteristics or architectural styles - they are mutts - changed multiple times over the years. None were the the work of a designer who significantly influenced an age. There is an attempt to state that William Henry Miller was a designer who significantly influenced an age, but the report states clearly that he "never developed an independent design mode, rather he relied upon styles popular during the late nineteenth century". None represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics. That would first require some definition as to exactly what is a familiar design feature of the community (maybe the skyline of Cornell that was used to put up those strange metal artwork pillars on the bridge) and I would ask what is so special about North Aurora Street when it is purely a transitional area running from hotel and restaurant row into Fall Creek. Please, we are not going to let this go. It is our position that there is no legal or historical reason for this wedge or at least our building to be included in this bureaucratic nightmare. Yes, you can read this into the record. Susan C. Kirby, Esq. Joch & Kirby 319 N. Aurora St. Ithaca, NY 14850 607-272-7279 6/15/2021 Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADcxOTc0NzI1LTA5YTMtNDI2YS05NDEzLWJkMDgyNTE4NGY5OQAQAC%2BbHdCkfUJItrJrpX2V86w…2/2 Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message may be legally privileged and contain confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (607-272- 7279), by fax (607-272-9976), or by return email, delete this message, and destroy any copies of print-outs of this message. Thank you. If you have not formally retained this firm for legal services, then we are not your attorneys and neither this communication nor any attachments hereto constitute the provision of legal services or the establishment or confirmation of an attorney-client relationship.