Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2006-08-17 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission August 17, 2006 Present: Kristin Brennan George Holets Alphonse Pieper, Chair Susan Stein Lynn Truame Leslie Chatterton, Staff Chair A. Pieper called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and read the legal notices for the public hearings. I. PUBLIC HEARING B. 123 South Cayuga Street, Ithaca Gas & Electric, Local Landmark – proposal to install awnings/sign. Business owner Rebecca Kim was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by S. Stein seconded by K. Brennan, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by G. Holets. RESOLUTION: Moved by Lynn Truame, seconded by Kristen Brennan. WHEREAS, 123 South Cayuga Street is a designated local landmark, as set forth in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application was submitted by business owner Rebecca Kim, and WHEREAS, the specific proposal involves the installation of five blue cloth awnings, one on Cayuga Street and four on East Green Street, each with lettering stating the name of the business and each with two crests, and q/planning/groups/ilpc/minutes/2006 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting held on August 17, 2006 the Commission reviewed the following materials: letter dated June 12, 2006 to Tom Nix, (Building Department) from Rebecca Kim; three color, computer- generated, photocopied graphic depictions showing a visual of the building with the proposed awnings, the awning valence with lettering and the emblematic crests and an enlarged version of the crest, submission #24904-17 - a paragraph description of the awning with a line drawing showing dimensions prepared for the hearing to the Board of Zoning Appeals, submission #2494-10 - the building permit application, submission #2694-19 comments of the Board of Planning and Development on the appeal, and WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the revised proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and WHEREAS, it appears that the project is a Type II action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, a public hearing for the purpose of considering approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness has been concluded, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • Constructed in 1916, the Ithaca Gas and Electric Corporation Building is architecturally and historically significant as the modern architectural identity of the new company formed by the consolidations of the Ithaca Gas Light Company and the Ithaca Electric Light & Power Company in the previous year as described in the 1990 National Register nomination form on file in the Department of Planning & Development • The building retains a high level of integrity. WHEREAS, in its determination of the current proposal for awnings/signs the Commission has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for alterations, new construction or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standards: #2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 2 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. As shown on the computer-generated graphic depiction of the building with the proposed awnings, the awnings are appropriately located in relation to the display window and the panels above. The proposal does not alter features or spaces that characterize the building, in keeping with Standard #2. As shown on the computer-generated graphic depiction of the building with the proposed awnings, the placement of the awnings with lettering and logo does not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. Though in some cases the number and size of the signs/awnings may not be compatible, in view of the massing, size and scale of the building and its corner site, the signs and awnings are compatible with the historic building, in keeping with Standard #9. The installation of the signs/awnings shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired, in keeping with Standard #10. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the local landmark, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal as presented meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness, with the following condition: • Staff shall review the attachment detail. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 3 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 A. 101 Thurston Avenue, Cornell Heights Historic District – proposal to construct garage. Property owner Hector Abruna was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by S. Stein, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets. RESOLUTION: Moved by Susan Stein, seconded by Kristen Brennan. WHEREAS, 101 Thurston Avenue is located in the Cornell Heights Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness has been submitted by Jim Hovanec with Paul Yamen Construction on behalf of property owner and occupant, Hector Abruna for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is a proposal for construction of a two bay, two-story garage, as described by the narrative dated 5/22/06, the photographs, scaled plan and elevation drawings dated 5/17/06 and the alternate scaled plans and elevation drawings dated 4/4/06, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the proposal is to provide parking for two cars and to increase storage on the property, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the 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 Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on June 6, 2006, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 4 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the discussion at the June 6, 2006 meeting, the applicant agreed to visually mark the dimension of space occupied by the proposed new construction on the site, and WHEREAS, the ILPC agreed to continue the meeting at the site on Wednesday, June 14, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. WHEREAS, ILPC members present at the site included N. Brcak, K. Brennan, G. Holets, S. Stein and A. Pieper, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a second public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • Research indicates that the house was constructed between 1914-1915 in the first phase of the development of Cornell Heights between 1899 and WWI. • The residence derives historic and architectural significance as a representative example of those houses exhibiting a mix of architectural styles popular during the first decades of the 20th century. • The residence retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural integrity. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to construct a detached garage the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following 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. The proposed garage is detached from the house and its construction will not destroy historic materials that characterize the property in keeping with Standard #9. The new work is differentiated from the old, in keeping with Standard #9. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 5 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 The new work is compatible in size, scale, massing, design, and materials with the residence and with other structures in the district, in keeping with Standard #9. The impact of the size, scale and massing of the new garage on the historic integrity of the residence is mitigated by the distance of the garage from the residence and its orientation to Thurston Avenue. The impact of the size, scale and massing of the new garage on the historic integrity of the residence and its environment is mitigated by the jerkin head gable which visually reduces the actual size of the roof. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 4-1-0 Yes K. Brennan G. Holets A. Pieper, Chair S. Stein No L. Truame Abstain 0 C. 804 ½ East Seneca Street, East Hill Historic District – proposal for window replacement. David Beer was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by S. Stein, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by G. Holets. Comments made by the Commission members: K. Brennan stated that the Commission typically requires a window survey prior to consideration of substantial window replacement proposals, but that in this case the survey’s not critical because the residence isn’t highly visible. She added that it would be important to retain the two-over-two configuration of the window sash. . - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 6 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 A. Pieper stated that the structure is a secondary building and as such, a total window survey may not be as important as it would on the primary building. He agreed that the two-over-two sash configuration is an important feature. L. Truame stated that she would like to see a window survey but agreed that given the location at the rear of the lot and the secondary nature of the building the lack of a survey is of less concern. G. Holets noted that the building is not listed in the historic district survey documentation, likely because of its obscure location. RESOLUTION C-1: Moved by George Holets, seconded by Susan Stein. WHEREAS, 804 ½ East Seneca Street is located in the East Hill Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by property owner David Beer for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the replacement of five second floor and two first floor two-over-two double-hung wood windows as described in the narrative dated 6/30/06and shown in the accompanying photographs #1), 2), 3), 4), 5), and 6), and WHEREAS, the purpose of the action is to replace the deteriorated wood windows, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the 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 Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on August 17, 2006, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The building was constructed between 1882 and 1919, most probably around 1910, and within the East Hill Historic District’s period of significance. It is historically and architecturally significant as a representative building of its time and contributes to the district ensemble. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 7 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 The property is historically significant through its association with Gamma Alpha fraternity during its early function as a detached dining hall and kitchen. The property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to replace windows the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standard: #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and where possible materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical or pictorial evidence. The existing windows are of poor quality and badly deteriorated. Repair of poor quality windows in badly deteriorated condition will not result in a satisfactory, well-functioning window. With the exception of windows on the north, (rear) façade, the windows are not easily visible. The replacement is limited to the window sashes, exterior casings will be preserved. Profiles of the replacement windows closely match profiles of the existing windows WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness with the following condition: - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 8 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 • Upon installation, wood shall be applied to the glass to simulate the visual character of the existing two-over-two windows. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 C. 804 ½ East Seneca Street, East Hill Historic – proposal for chimney removal. Property owner David Beer was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by K. Brennan. RESOLUTION C-2: Moved by Kristen Brennan, seconded by George Holets. WHEREAS, 804 ½ East Seneca Street is located in the East Hill Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness has been submitted by property owner David Beer for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the partial removal of an exterior chimney on the north rear façade, to below the eaves. Though not referenced in the submitted narrative dated 6/30/06, the chimney is shown in accompanying photograph #3), and WHEREAS, the purpose of the action is to remove the most unstable portion of the deteriorated chimney, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 9 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, a public hearing for the purpose of considering approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on August 17, 2006, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The building was constructed between 1882 and 1919, most probably around 1910, and within the East Hill Historic District’s period of significance. It is historically and architecturally significant as a representative building of its time and contributes to the district ensemble. The property is historically and architecturally significant through its association with Gamma Alpha fraternity during its early function as a detached dining hall and kitchen. The property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to partially remove the chimney, the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standard: #2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. #5 Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. Physical evidence shows that the chimney construction is of poor quality and is currently badly deteriorated. The chimney expresses the location of an interior fireplace and, as such, is a feature that characterizes the property as set forth in Standard #2. Although the chimney characterizes the property, as set forth in Standard #2, given the poor quality of its construction and its location on the rear façade, the chimney is neither a distinctive feature nor an example of craftsmanship that characterizes this historic property as set forth in Standard #5 - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 10 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic District, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness with the following condition: A portion of the chimney shall remain to express the location of the interior fireplace. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 D. 802 East Seneca Street –proposal of wood steps with concrete stoop. David Beer was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by L. Truame, seconded by S. Stein, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by S. Stein. RESOLUTION-D: Moved by Susan Stein, seconded by L. Truame WHEREAS, 802 East Seneca Street is located in the East Hill Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by property owner David Beer for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the replacement of a wood entrance stair with a pre-cast concrete stoop, as described in the narrative dated 6/30/06and shown in the accompanying photographs, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the action is to replace the deteriorated wood stair, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 11 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, the action has already taken place, without a Certificate of Appropriateness, and WHEREAS, the ILPC shall review the action to determine whether or not it meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4 E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the 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 Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on August 17, 2006, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The property was constructed in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, within the East Hill Historic District’s period of significance The property is historically and architecturally significant as a representative example of a later nineteenth century structure with typical though subdued Queen Anne style decorative detailing. • The property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to replace a wood entrance stair with a concrete stoop, the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standard: #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and where possible materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical or pictorial evidence. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 12 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The deteriorated steps, since removed, were constructed of pressure treated lumber and as seen in a photograph accompanying the New York State Building Structure Inventory Form on file in the City of Ithaca Department of Planning and Development are of no historic or architectural significance. The modest, unadorned, setback entrance is not an identifying architectural feature of the residence. In reference to Standard #6, pictorial evidence of the original stair is not readily available. The new stoop is differentiated from the historic fabric of the residence and is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment, in keeping with Standard #9 The new stoop has been added in such a manner that if removed in the future the essential form and integrity of the historic property and environment would be unimpaired, in keeping with Standard #10. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic District, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness with the following condition: • The metal railing shall be painted the color of the siding. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 13 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 4-1-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan S. Stein L. Truame No George Holets Abstain E. 412 University Avenue, University Hill Historic District – proposal for window replacement. Property owner Michael Posner was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. Property owner Kevin Brew spoke in favor of the proposal citing all the effort, time and money the property owner has invested into the property. There being no one else to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by L. Truame, seconded by S. Stein. RESOLUTION- E: Moved by George Holets, seconded by Lynn Truame. WHEREAS, 412 University Avenue is located in the University Hill Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, revisions to an approved project were submitted for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission by property owner Michael Posner and must be reviewed and granted a Certificate of Appropriateness prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, and WHEREAS, the specific proposal involves replacement of approved all wood one-over- one, double-hung Marvin windows with aluminum clad, wood, one-over-one Pella windows WHEREAS, at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting held on February 10, 2005, the Commission reviewed the proposal to enlarge four window openings, three on the north façade and one on the south façade to meet egress requirements of the Building Code of New York State and thereby allow for removal of the existing fire escape on the south façade. Replacement windows where stipulated to be all wood, double-hung Marvin windows. Material reviewed included a brief narrative description of the proposal prepared by property owner Michael Posner and dated January 25, 2005 and photocopied photographs showing the north elevation view from the sidewalk and north elevation view from the neighboring backyard, (nd). The narrative also described a proposal to replace all existing one-over-one; double hung wood windows with all wood double hung Marvin windows - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 14 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, following the public hearing held on February 10, 2005 the Commission voted to approve the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness, and WHEREAS, at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting held on August 17, 2006 the Commission reviewed the proposal to use a Pella, aluminum clad wood, one-over-one, double- hung wood window as an alternative to the Marvin window approved on February 10, 2005. Material reviewed included a brief narrative description of the revised proposal, and a material sample of the Pella replacement window, and WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the revised proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and WHEREAS, it appears that the project is a Type II action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, a public hearing for the purpose of considering approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness has been concluded, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • Constructed in 1891, the residence at 412 University Avenue is within the period of significance of the University Hill Historic District and is a contributing element of the district. • The building derives architectural significance as a representative example that combines the Queen Anne and Shingle styles, both popular during the time of its construction. • The building retains a high level of integrity. WHEREAS, in its determination of the current proposed revisions the Commission has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for alterations, new construction or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standard: # 6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replace. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 15 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Existing wood, one-over-one, double-hung windows will be replaced with aluminum-clad wood, one-over-one over, double hung windows. Like the previously approved Marvin windows, the Pella replacement windows are custom sized to fit into the existing window openings. As described in the narrative the Pella window matches dimension of the mid rail and stile of the original sash better than the Marvin window. As with the previous proposal the new window trim will match existing trim profiles. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the University Hill Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal as presented meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness, with the following conditions: • All trim dimensions shall match historic dimensions. • Crown above windows shall be wood. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 F. 408 University Avenue – proposal for window alteration. Property owner Kevin Brew was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by L. Truame, seconded by S. Stein, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by K. Brennan. RESOLUTION-F: Moved by Kristen Brennan, seconded by George Holets. WHEREAS, 408 University Avenue is located in the University Hill Historic District as provided for in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 16 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by property owner Kevin Brew for review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, (ILPC), and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the removal of a window on the western most end of the south façade and relocation of a window on the west, (rear) façade and WHEREAS, the purpose of the action is to increase the functional space of the small kitchen in a planned remodeling, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the applicant has reviewed the submitted documentation of the project received on August 1, 2006 and including the following: a brief narrative description of the proposal, a plan view of the residence showing the locations of the affected windows, and a plan view of the planned kitchen remodeling showing locations of the affected windows, 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 Certificate of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meeting on August 17, 2006, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The period of significance for the development of the area now known as the University Hill Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca University Hill Historic Report as 1867-1927. The building was constructed in 1891, within the University Hill Historic District’s period of significance and is a contributing element of the district. The building is historically and architecturally significant as a good example of the Queen Anne style and as such contributes to the ensemble of buildings that together reflect the significance of the district. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 17 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 The building is historically significant through its association with the Cornell family and later with George S. Moler, the Cornell University Professor of Physics whose work was pivotal to the production of early, outdoor electric lighting, as stated in the City of Ithaca University Hill Historic District Report. The property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to respectively remove one window and relocate one window, the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for alterations, new construction or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standards: #5 Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The collection of one-over-one, double-hung wood windows comprise a grouping that is a distinctive fenestration pattern representative of this Queen Anne style residence. The one-over-one, double-hung wood windows proposed for removal and relocation are not easily visible and will have a small impact on the overall fenestration pattern, in keeping with Standard #5. As stated in the narrative description, the opening resulting from removal of the south window shall be sheathed and trimmed to match existing sheathing and trim on the exterior wall, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description, the window proposed for relocation will involve reuse of the existing window in the new location and will include trim detailing to match existing trim, in keeping with Standard #9 - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 18 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 As described in the narrative, the proposed alteration will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired, in keeping with Standard #10 WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the University Hill Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness, with the following conditions: • Removal of the window on the south façade shall be limited to the window sash. • Jamb and exterior trim shall remain in place. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 G. 518 East State Street – proposal to pave parking/area driveway. Owner’s representative, Gary Fellows, Director of Property Maintenance, was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by K. Brennan, seconded by G. Holets, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by L. Truame. RESOLUTION: Moved by Lynn Truame, seconded by Susan Stein. WHEREAS, 518 East State Street is located in the East Hill Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 19 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by the property owner’s representative Gary Fellows, Director of Property Maintenance for Unity House of Cayuga County Inc., and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is the paving of the gravel parking area at the rear (north) of the property, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the action is to improve conditions for residents of the facility, some of whom experience mobility impairment, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance for which no further environmental review is required, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed submitted documentation of the project dated July 28, 2006 and including a brief narrative description of the proposal and a site map dated June 26, 2000, and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: The period of significance for the development of the area now known as the East Hill Historic District is identified in the City of Ithaca Historic District Summary as 1830 – 1932. The building was constructed c. 1893, the year it appears on the 1893 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map, and is a contributing element of the district. The building is historically and architecturally significant as a representative example of late 19th century residential design and as such contributes to the ensemble of buildings that together reflect the significance of the district. The property retains sufficient integrity to reflect its historic and architectural significance. WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to pave the existing gravel parking area at the rear of the residence, the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for alterations, new construction or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 20 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standards: #2 The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features or spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. As stated in the narrative description and shown on the site map, the area proposed for paving is already the site of gravel surface parking and is separated from the residence, a feature that mitigates the physical impact of the proposed paving. As described in the narrative and shown on the site map, the area proposed for paving is the same area currently covered with gravel. The alteration does not alter spaces that characterize the property, in keeping with Standard #2. As it appears on the site map, the parking area is not easily visible from the public right-of-way, thereby mitigating the visual impact of the proposed paving. As described in the narrative the paving will undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and it environment would be unimpaired, in keeping with Standard #10. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the East Hill Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission approves the request for a Certificated of Appropriateness. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 21 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 H. 130 East Court Street – proposal for Court Street addition. Owner’s representative, Architect Claudia Brenner, was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by K. Brennan, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by L. Truame. RESOLUTION H-1: Moved by Susan Stein, seconded by George Holets. WHEREAS, 130 West Court Street is located in the DeWitt Park Historic District as provided for in Section 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by the owner’s representative Randy Hatcher, and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is a proposal to remove an existing rear porch and construct a two-story addition, and WHEREAS, the purpose of the proposal is to increase functional interior space, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and thus requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the submitted documentation of the project received on August 2nd and including the following: a narrative overview, a narrative description of the two-story addition; a survey map of 130 East Court Street dated 7/21/93; drawings including a proposed lot plan, existing first floor, second floor, and roof plans all showing portions to be removed; existing north, east, west, and south elevations; the proposed first and second floor plans, and the proposed north elevation, and WHEREAS, the applicant has provided sufficient documentation and information to evaluate impacts of the proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 22 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • The period of significance for the development of the area now known as the DeWitt Park Historic District is identified on the DeWitt Park Historic District Summary as 1820 – 1930. • Documentation on the New York State Building/Structure Inventory form, physical evidence of the building’s architectural construction and style, and an early map of the Village of Ithaca dated 1851 all indicate that the residence was constructed prior to 1851. • Constructed within the DeWitt Park Historic District’s period of significance, 130 East Court Street is a contributing element of the DeWitt Park Historic District. • 130 East Court Street is architecturally and historically significant as an early and excellent example of a federal style residence, one of few such surviving structures in the city. • 130 East Court Street is architecturally and historically significant as physical representation of Ithaca’s early urban development. • 130 East Court Street retains a high level of integrity of historic fabric • Sanborn Co Fire Insurance map of 1910 does not show any rear porch addition, however the 1919 map shows a one-story addition approximately half the depth of the existing one-story porch. • Physical evidence indicates that little historic fabric of the early one-story addition survives in the current enclosed rear porch WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to remove the existing rear porch and construct a new addition the ILPC has considered the following: In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following Standard: #4 Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 23 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. #10 New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Although the existing enclosed porch may have previously acquired significance in its own right, as set forth in Standard #4, in its current condition the porch retains insufficient integrity of historic fabric to reflect its past significance. As stated in the narrative description of the two-story addition and shown on the first floor plan, the new work is differentiated from the old by a design that steps in the east and west walls of the new addition 1’ 6” from the east and west walls of the historic residence in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-story addition and shown on the proposed north elevation, the new work is differentiated from the old by a design that lowers the roof height and reduces the roof pitch of the new addition, when compared with the roof of the existing historic residence, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-story addition and shown on the proposed north elevation, the reduced size and scale of the new addition is compatible with and gives deference to the size and scale of the historic residence, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-story addition, the cement clapboard exterior sheathing and proposed wood, wall trim details are compatible with the sheathing and detailing of the of the central volume as described in the narrative description of the two-story addition, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-story addition, the clad, one- over-one windows and the full-light exterior door differentiate the new work from the old, while the proposed wide, flat window and door casings contribute to the compatibility of the new addition, in keeping with Standard #9 - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 24 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 As described in the narrative description of the two-story addition, the exposed masonry block foundation differentiates the new work from the old, while its alignment with the foundation of the historic residence is contributes to the compatibility of the new addition, in keeping with Standard #9. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the DeWitt Park Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction of the new addition. RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes A. Pieper, Chair K. Brennan G. Holets S. Stein L. Truame No 0 Abstain 0 H-2. 130 East Court Street – proposal for detached garage. The property owner’s representative, architect Claudia Brenner, was present to address the Commission concerning the proposal. Public Hearing On a motion made by G. Holets, seconded by K. Brennan, Chair A. Pieper opened the public hearing. There being no one to address the Commission, Chair A. Pieper closed the public hearing on a motion made by S. Stein, seconded by L. Truame. RESOLUTION: Moved by Lynn Truame, seconded by Kristen Brennan. WHEREAS, 130 West Court Street is located in the DeWitt Park Historic District as provided for in Sections 228-3 and 228-4 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4(E) of the Municipal Code, an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness was submitted by the owner’s representative Randy Hatcher, and WHEREAS, the action under consideration is a proposal to construct a detached two story garage, and - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 25 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 WHEREAS, the purpose of the proposal is to create storage for two cars, and WHEREAS, the project is a Type II Action under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and thus requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the submitted documentation of the project received on August 2nd and including the following: a narrative overview, a narrative description of the two-car garage; a survey map of 130 East Court Street dated 7/21/93; drawings including a proposed lot plan, proposed garage plan, proposed garage front (south) elevation, proposed garage section, and proposed garage truss detail, 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, following review of the application materials and conclusion of a public hearing held on August 17, 2006, the ILPC made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the proposal: • The period of significance for the development of the area now known as the DeWitt Park Historic District is identified on the DeWitt Park Historic District Summary as 1820 – 1930. • Documentation on the New York State Building/Structure Inventory form, physical evidence of the building’s architectural construction and style, an early map of the Village of Ithaca dated 1851 indicate that the residence was constructed prior to 1851. • Constructed within the DeWitt Park Historic District’s period of significance, 130 East Court Street is a contributing element of the DeWitt Park Historic District. • 130 East Court Street is architecturally and historically significant as an early and excellent example of a federal style residence, one of few such surviving structures in the city. • 130 East Court Street is architecturally and historically significant as physical representation of Ithaca’s early urban development. • 130 East Court Street retains a high level of integrity of historic fabric WHEREAS, in its determination of the proposal to construct a new garage and construct a new addition the ILPC has considered the following: - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 26 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 In this and all evaluation of proposals for new construction in historic districts, the ILPC is guided by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and in this case, specifically the following 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 stated in the narrative description of the two-gar garage the new construction is differentiated from the old by a design that includes simplified “lamb chop” cornices, and no rake overhangs, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-car garage, the cement clapboard exterior sheathing and proposed wood wall trim details are compatible with the sheathing and detailing of the wood-sided portion of the historic residence, in keeping with Standard #9, As stated in the narrative description of the two-car garage, and shown on the drawing of the garage front, (south) elevation, the proposed garage doors differentiate the garage from historic construction, but contribute to the compatibility of the overall design of the garage, in keeping with Standard #9. As stated in the narrative description of the two-car garage, the proposed six-panel man door with wide, flat, door casing is compatible with doors and casings on the historic residence, in keeping with Standard #9 As stated in the narrative description of the two-car garage, the new work is differentiated from the old by a design that includes a masonry block foundation, as is proposed for the new addition, in keeping with Standard #9. WHEREAS, the proposal will not have a substantial adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the DeWitt Park Historic District, now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal meets criteria for approval under Section 228-4E (1) (a) of the Municipal Code, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission approves the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct the two car garage, with the following condition: • Final staff approval of the garage door design. - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 27 Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held on August 17, 2006 RECORD OF VOTE: Carried 5-0-0 Yes Alphonse Pieper, Chair Kristen Brennan George Holets Susan Stein Lynn Truame No Abstain II. PLEASURE OF THE CHAIR A. Administrative Matters None B. Public Comment on Matters of Interest None C. Communications None III. OLD BUSINESS None IV. NEW BUSINESS None V. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Leslie A. Chatterton, Secretary Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission - - J:\GROUPS\Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission\ILPC Meetings\1989-2009 Materials\Minutes\2006\0817.doc 28