Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2021-12-21Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 1 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) Regular Monthly Meeting Minutes — December 21, 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 (joined late, around 7:30 p.m.) Absent: Avi Smith, Member Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 6:14 p.m. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 310 East Court Street, East Hill Historic District – Proposal to Construct a 2-Story Addition on the North Elevation. Mark Cushing of Rocco Design Build appeared in front of the Commission to present a proposal to build a two-story addition on the rear of the Ithaca Dentistry offices on Court Street. After some discussion, several Commission members expressed concerns that the new addition would result in the removal of historic features and fabric that characterize the building. RESOLUTION ~TABLED~ Moved by S. Stein, seconded by D. Kramer, and passed unanimously. B. 223 South Albany Street, Henry St. John Historic District – Retroactive Requests for Approval: Removal of One-Over-One Wood Sash in Six Windows on the South Elevation and Installation of Six, One-Over-One Vinyl Insert Units in the Same Location; and Removal of a Wood Entrance Door on the West Elevation and the Installation of a Fiberglass Entrance in the Same Location Homeowner Liam O’Kane appeared in front of the Commission to present a proposal to retroactively approve replacement of six windows and one door. He said his contractor never pulled the required building permits, and he was unaware he was supposed to get Commission approval. Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 2 Public Hearing (on the door replacement) On a motion S. Gibian, seconded by D. Kramer, 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 K. Olson. RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein. WHEREAS, 223 South Albany Street is located within the Henry St. John Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 2013, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, dated December 3, 2021, was submitted for review to the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Liam F. O’Kane, property owner, including the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); and (2) seven photographs documenting existing conditions as well as the proposed products in situ, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for 223 South Albany Street, and the City of Ithaca’s Henry St. John Historic District Summary Statement, and WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves a retroactive request for approval for the removal of one-over-one, double-hung, wood window sash in six window openings on the south (secondary) elevation and the installation one-over-one vinyl window inserts within those openings; the project also involves the retroactive request for approval for the removal of a wood door on the west elevation and the installation of half-glazed fiberglass door with simulated wood graining and leaded glass light, 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/has not] 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 December 21, 2021, now therefore be it RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 3 As identified in the City of Ithaca’s Henry St. John Historic District Summary Statement, the period of significance for the area now known as the Henry St. John Historic District is 1830-1932. As indicated in the individual property entry in the annotated list of properties included within the Henry St. John Historic District, the Craftsman Style residence at 223 South Albany Street was constructed in 1928. Constructed within the period of significance of the Henry St. John Historic District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing element of the Henry St. John Historic District. In their review of the project, the ILPC noted the following existing conditions at the property: 1. apart from the subject windows, all the window openings in the residence have non-historic replacement units that were installed prior to the designation of the local historic district in 2014; 2. the variety of replacement unit types are unified and disguised by the presence of wood combination storm windows at each opening; and (3) the subject door opening is likely not original and was likely installed when the property was briefly used as a duplex. 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: 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 #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. When the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 4 distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 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 removal of the [historic] wood door [removed/did not] removed distinctive materials and [altered/ did not alter] features and spaces that characterize the property. Proposed Language if door replacement removed historic materials: With respect to Principle #2 and Standard #6, it is the opinion of the property owner that the severity of the deterioration of the wood door was such that its replacement was required. Since the historic wood door was discarded, contractors specializing in the repair of historic doors and members of the ILPC were unable to make an independent assessment of its condition. As represented in the submitted photograph, it appears the wood door was in [fair/poor] condition. Also with respect to Standard #6, the fiberglass door [matches/does not match] the old in design, color, texture, materials, and other visual qualities. [if material will not match, explain why not and why that’s acceptable]. Also with respect to Principle #2, and Standard #9, the proposed fiberglass door [is/is not] compatible with the massing, size, and scale of the historic property or its historic environment. [if “not”, describe qualities of the project that are not compatible and in what ways they are not ] RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the replacement of the [historic] wood door with a fiberglass unit [has/has not] had a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the 223 South Albany Street and the Henry St. John Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be it further, RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the removal of the [historic] wood door [meets/does not meet] criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code and is a violation of Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the installed fiberglass door [meets/does not meet] criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the ILPC [approves/denies] the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, and be it further Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 5 Proposed additional resolve #1: [If the Commission doesn’t accept the removal or replacement units] RESOLVED, that the violation of Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code for the removal of an original, character-defining feature without approval is referred to the Office of the City Attorney for resolution. To mitigate the negative impacts of the above- described inappropriate alteration, the owner will [specify how/what needs to change to make the alteration more compatible] Proposed additional resolve #2: [If the Commission accepts the removal but not the replacement units] RESOLVED, to mitigate the negative impacts of the above-described inappropriate alteration the owner will [specify how/what needs to change to make the alteration more compatible] RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: D. Kramer Seconded by: S. Stein In Favor: E. Finegan, S. Gibian, D. Kramer, K. Olson, S. Stein Against: 0 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. RESOLUTION (replacement windows) ~TABLED~ Moved by S. Stein, seconded by D. Kramer, and passed unanimously. 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. Approved by ILPC: January 18, 2022 6 III. OLD BUSINESS Alderperson D. Fleming said she had reached out to the Mayor and asked for a timeline on Library Place. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • The September 21, 2021 and October 19, 2021 minutes were approved unanimously on a motion by K. Olson, seconded by S. Stein. V. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS D. Kramer and the other members thanked Alderperson D. Fleming for her work with the Commission. B. Mc Cracken reminded the Commission members complete the annual Sexual Harassment Prevention Training or submit proof they have completed the same through their employers. VI. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by K. Olson, and seconded by D. Kramer, the meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bryan McCracken Secretary Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission