HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2016-05-10Approved by ILPC: 6/14/16
1 of 14
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Minutes — May 10, 2016
Present:
Ed Finegan, Chair
David Kramer, Vice Chair
Stephen Gibian
Jennifer Minner
Katelin Olson
Seph Murtagh (Common Council
Liaison)
Bryan McCracken, Staff
Charles Pyott, Staff
Chair Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:38 p.m.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 300 & 400 Blocks of N. Tioga St., DeWitt Park Historic District — Proposal to Replace Paving
& Curb Materials
Applicant and City of Director of Engineering Services Tim Logue described the details of the
application, noting the Board of Public Works wants to reconstruct the paving and continue the work
that was done further north on Cayuga Street. T. Logue indicated he would like to perform a full-depth
reconstruction of the paving and curbing materials, since they are so deteriorated.
E. Finegan asked if there were any reason the existing curbing could not be reused. T. Logue replied
that there is a mixture of materials (e.g., concrete, red sandstone) and much of the sandstone is in poor
condition, so the intent is to replace it.
E. Finegan noted most Commission members independently conducted a site visits and concluded much
of the red sandstone appears relatively intact. T. Logue replied that there are 825 linear feet of
sandstone between the two blocks, representing only about half the curbing that needs to be replaced.
J. Minner asked if the applicant received a copy of the May 5, 2016 letter from Historic Ithaca that
suggested that the curbs are a character-defining feature of the Historic District and should therefore be
replaced in-kind
T. Logue replied, yes. His intention is to structure the bidding process so the standard granite curbing
would serve as the base bid, with reclaimed red sandstone as an alternate bid. He added that Assistant
Superintendent of Public Works Ray Benjamin would prefer to employ granite, which is a little more
durable. At this time, he does not know what the cost difference would be.
J. Minner remarked it would be highly desirable to restore the entire block with red sandstone, if at all
feasible. T. Logue responded he very much expects the red sandstone curbing would be considerably
more expensive than the granite.
E. Finegan asked if any existing red sandstone appears reusable. T. Logue replied that he is not sure but
it is possible. Reuse would depend on the condition of the stone once removed and it’s overall
dimensions. The curbs need to be at least 18” high to allow for an 6” reveal. He also noted there are no
radius pieces available in red sandstone.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
2 of 14
K. Olson indicated the Commission should determine if the red sandstone curbing is a character-
defining feature of the Historic District. Cost should not be a factor in the Commission’s decision-
making.
S. Gibian asked if the City would also replace the sidewalk and driveway cuts. T. Logue replied that
they would not replace the driveway cuts at Tioga Street and Court Street. He does not yet know what
would be done with the other driveway cuts.
S. Gibian indicated it is one issue the Commission should consider — how the sandstone would
coordinate with the driveway cuts. Also, if sandstone is ultimately not used, any salvageable sandstone
should be stored and installed in a highly visible place (e.g., DeWitt Park).
T. Logue replied that the City could direct the contractor that the City will have right-of-first-refusal for
the salvageable sandstone.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by J. Minner, Chair Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
John Lewis, Historic Ithaca, urged the Commission to make every effort to save the red sandstone
curbing, in keeping with the historic character of the Historic District.
There being no further public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by D. Kramer,
seconded by K. Olson.
B. McCracken explained if the cost of replacing the sandstone exceeds the cost of granite by 20%, then
Common Council would make the final decision. One way or the other, the issue would be discussed
with the Commission first.
T. Logue noted he will not know the cost of the sandstone until bids are received from the contractors in
open public bidding. The City would only purchase the replacement sandstone pieces it needs. Since it
will not know which sandstone pieces are salvageable until they are excavated, the final cost will not
truly be known until the project is under way.
J. Minner agreed with K. Olson that cost should not be a consideration for the Commission.
S. Gibian asked if bump-outs would be installed at the curved perimeters. T. Logue replied, only at the
intersections. S. Gibian asked if that means there would be no sandstone available for the intersections.
T. Logue replied, that is correct.
RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Olson, seconded by D. Kramer.
WHEREAS, the 300 block and a portion of 400 block of N. Tioga St. are located in the DeWitt Park
Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
in 1971, and as listed on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places in
1971, and
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
3 of 14
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness dated March 7, 2016 was submitted for review to the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Tim Logue on behalf of property owner City of
Ithaca – Department of Public Works, including the following: (1) two narratives
respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); (2)
four drawings titled “Topographic Map,” “Construction Limits,” “Proposed Pavement
Road Cross Section,” and “Existing Stone Curb;” (3) a memo to the Board of Public
Works from Tim Logue, Director of Engineering Services, dated February 3, 2016; (4) a
memo from Kent Johnson, Junior Transportation Engineer to Tim Logue regarding
“Description of Design Alternates for N. Tioga St. Project;” and (5) the City of Ithaca
Bicycle Boulevard Plan: A Plan for a Network of Low-Traffic and Traffic-Calmed
Bicycling Routes, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has also reviewed the City of Ithaca’s DeWitt Park Historic District Summary
Statement, and
WHEREAS, the proposed project involves the reconstruction of the 300 and 400 blocks of N. Tioga
St, including the removal and replacement of the asphalt wearing surface, street base and
sub-base, curbing, and storm sewer, 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 Certificate
of Appropriateness was conducted at the regularly scheduled ILPC meetings on April 12
and May 10, 2016, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposal:
As identified in the City of Ithaca’s DeWitt Park Historic District Summary Statement,
the period of significance for the area now known as the DeWitt Park Historic District is
1820-1930.
The red “Medina” sandstone curbs and brick street pavers found beneath portions of the
asphalt wearing surface along the 300 and 400 blocks of N. Tioga St were installed in the
late-19th and early-20th centuries as part of an organized municipal effort to improve the
condition and quality of the streets within the newly chartered city.
Installed within the period of significance of the DeWitt Park Historic District and
possessing a high level of architectural integrity, the street improvements are a
contributing element of the DeWitt Park Historic District.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
4 of 14
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 #5 Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples
of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
Standard #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced.
When 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.
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 replacement of the
asphalt wearing surface, street base and sub-base will not remove distinctive materials
and will not alter features and spaces that characterize the property.
Red “Medina” sandstone was used extensively for curbing in the DeWitt Park
neighborhood during the late-19th and early-20th centuries. Surviving sandstone curbs
represent a distinctive construction technique and type of craftsmanship that
characterized the neighborhood during its period of significance and provide insight into
the history and development of the area. Therefore, with respect to Principle #2,
Standard #2, Standard #5, and Standard #9, the replacement of the red sandstone curbing
with granite will remove distinctive materials and will alter features and spaces that
characterize the property.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
5 of 14
With respect to Principle #2 and Standard #6, as described by the applicant, the severity
of the deterioration of the street’s asphalt wearing surface, base and sub-base, and storm
sewer require their replacement. The proposed new work will match the old in design,
color, texture, and other visual qualities.
With respect to Principle #2 and Standard #6, as described by the applicant and observed
by the ILPC, the severity of the deterioration of the sandstone curbs does not require their
replacement. The proposed granite material will not match the old in design, color,
texture, material and other visual qualities. The granite curb’s rough and smooth
surfaces, and granulated gray color do not replicated the relatively smooth surface and
consistent brownish red color of the historic material.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed asphalt paving is
compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the historic district
and its environment.
However, with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed granite curbing is
not compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property
and its environment.
RESOLVED, that, based on findings set forth above, the proposal replace the asphalt wearing surface,
base and sub-base of the 300 and 400 blocks of N. Tioga St. will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the 300 and 400
blocks of N. Tioga St. and the DeWitt Park Historic District as set forth in Section 228-6,
and be it further
RESOLVED, that, based on findings set forth above, the proposal to replace the sandstone curbs with
granite curbs along the 300 and 400 blocks of N. Tioga St. will have a substantial adverse
effect on the aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance of the 300 and 400 blocks
of N. Tioga St. and the DeWitt Park Historic District as set forth in Section 228-6, and be
it further
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal to
replace the asphalt wearing surface, base, and sub-base along the 300 and 400 blocks of
N. Tioga St. meets the criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code,
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal to
replace sandstone curbs with granite does not meet the 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 to replace the
asphalt wearing surface, base, and sub-base, and denies the replacement of sandstone curbs
with granite, with the following condition(s):
Brick pavers revealed beneath the existing asphalt wearing surface shall be carefully
removed and securely stored off-site for future reuse in other applications.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
6 of 14
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: K. Olson
Seconded by: D. Kramer
In Favor: D. Kramer, E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian, J. Minner
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: S. Stein, M. McGandy
Vacancies: 0
B. 40 Ridgewood Rd., Cornell Heights Historic District — Proposal to Repair Porch Ceiling
Applicant Tom Fox was not present to discuss the proposal. B. McCracken described the details of the
proposal, noting it concerns a two-story porch with a tongue-and-groove wood floor on the second story,
through which water has been penetrating down to the first-story porch ceiling The accumulated
moisture underneath has rusted the expanded metal lath supporting the plaster. The proposal is to
remove the damaged sections, install a cement board material, and apply a new coat of plaster that will
be indistinguishable from the original material. The ceiling’s appearance would not change. The
contractor indicated it is a long-term solution for preventing further deterioration. Since the area of
deterioration is fairly well-delineated, it would likely not occur again.
J. Minner noted it seems a reasonable proposal. In the future, she would be comfortable delegating
similar proposals to staff-level review.
S. Gibian expressed concern with the proposed ARDEX OVP™ material, which is for use on concrete.
He also questioned how well the 43-foot-long seam in the middle of the porch could be feathered in.
Public Hearing
On a motion by J. Minner, seconded by K. Olson, Chair Finegan opened the Public Hearing. There being
no public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by J. Minner.
D. Kramer indicated he would be satisfied with a staff-level review. K. Olson agreed.
The application was delegated to staff-level review.
C. 408 S. Albany St., Henry St. John Historic District — Proposal to Replace Roof
Applicants Deborah Benson and Teresa Ferrara described the details of the proposal, noting the
intention is to replace the existing roofing with a similar roofing material. They displayed a sample of
what would be used.
There were no objections to the proposed roofing material.
B. McCracken noted, if the Commission agrees, he could approve it at staff-level.
J. Minner expressed no objection. (She does not favor regulating these kinds of color choices in great
detail.)
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
7 of 14
Public Hearing
On a motion by S. Gibian, seconded by D. Kramer, Chair Finegan opened the Public Hearing. There
being no public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by K. Olson, seconded by D.
Kramer.
The application was delegated to staff-level review.
II. COMMUNICATIONS
421 N. Albany St., Dennis-Newton House, Individual Local Landmark — Letter from New
York State Office of Parks, Recreation, & Historic Preservation Regarding Nomination of
Property to State & National Register of Historic Places
B. McCracken announced that the property has been nominated for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places and as a Certified Local Government, the City of Ithaca is required to comment on the
nomination. The building is already a local landmark.
J. Minner questioned why the building is not being nominated as also having national significance. B.
McCracken indicated that was a decision of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). He does not
know what the underlying rationale was, but he could investigate it.
K. Olson agreed it should be nominated as having national significance. B. McCracken replied that the
City of Ithaca could certainly make that recommendation.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by J. Minner, Chair Finegan opened the Public Hearing. There being
no public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by K. Olson, seconded by D. Kramer.
RESOLUTION: Moved by J. Minner, seconded by K. Olson.
WHEREAS, in its capacity as a New York State Certified Local Government (CLG), as designated in
1986 by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation
(PARKS), the City of Ithaca is required to participate in the nomination process for the
Dennis-Newton House at 421 N. Albany St., currently under consideration for
nomination to the State and National Registers of Historic Places by the New York State
Historic Preservation Review Board, and
WHEREAS, the specific requirements for participation include the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission (ILPC) preparing a report stating whether or not, in its opinion, the property
meets criteria for listing on the New York State and National Registers and the City’s
elected official, Mayor Svante Myrick, transmitting the Commission’s report and his
recommendation to the State Historic Preservation Office, and
WHEREAS, based on the recommendations of the ILPC and City of Ithaca Planning Board, the
Dennis-Newton House at 421 N. Albany St., was designated by the City of Ithaca’s
Common Council as an individual local landmark on April 1, 2015, and
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
8 of 14
WHEREAS, the ILPC considered the nomination for the State and National Registers at the regular
meeting held on May 10, 2016, the agenda for which is routinely posted in advance of the
meeting in City Hall, 108 E. Green St., and on the City’s web site, and
WHEREAS, documentation reviewed by the ILPC includes the letter dated April 19, 2016 sent from
Ruth Pierpont, Director of the Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau at PARKS,
and accompanying material from PARKS, including the National and State Registers
Criteria for Evaluation, Frequently Asked Questions About the State and National
Registers of Historic Places in New York State, and the draft National Register of
Historic Places Registration Form, and
WHEREAS, of the four criteria listed, the nomination has been proposed under criterion A as follows:
A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of our history
WHEREAS, the ILPC concurs with Section 8 of the draft National Register of Historic Places
Registration form, Statement of Significant, and specifically the statement:
“Constructed c. 1869, the Dennis-Newton house at 421 North Albany Street in Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York is significant under Criterion A for its association with
the early formation and founding of the Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity, the first Greek
letter, African-American collegiate fraternity in the United States. It’s also significant
for social history for its association with the African-American owners and their long
ownership of the property.”
WHEREAS, in making a determination about whether Criterion A has been met as it relates to
educational history and African American ethnic heritage, the ILPC has noted the
following:
Fraternities were an integral part of student life at Cornell University from its inception;
however, African-American male students were not admitted membership into these
organizations and generally lived apart, both literally and figuratively, from the rest of
the student population. With the purpose of establishing an organization that would
provide a platform for socialization and mutual support, a cohort of African-American
students decided to form a study group and literary society. Their first meeting was
held in the home of Edward and Lula Newton at 421 North Albany Street in 1905. This
group would later evolve into Alpha Phi Alpha, the first Greek-letter, African-
American collegiate fraternal organization in the United States, and 421 North Albany
Street was considered its birthplace. The connection between the house and the
formation of the Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity makes it a significant site for an important
episode in African-American history and American collegiate education history.
WHEREAS, in making a determination about whether Criterion A has been met as it relates to social
history and African American ethnic heritage, the ILPC has noted the following:
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
9 of 14
The residence at 421 North Albany Street was originally constructed around 1869 for
Norman Dennis (1833-1908), an early African-American resident in the City of Ithaca
who was born in New York State and worked as mason and laborer. Dennis also helped
found the African-American lodge of the Odd Fellows in Elmira, New York. Dennis’
daughter, Lula, inherited the house in 1893 but transferred the deed in 1898 to her
husband, Edward Newton. Edward Newton (c.1856-1932) worked as a porter for Sage
College at Cornell University and was longtime employee at the Psi Upsilon fraternity
house. He was an active member of Ithaca’s African-American community and
supported the efforts of early-19th century African-American students at Cornell to
form a fraternal organization. Lula and Edward Newton live in the house at 421 North
Albany Street until their deaths in 1928 and 1932 respectively. The house remained in
the Newton family until 1982 when the deed to the house was transferred by Lula and
Edward Newton’s son, Norman Dennis Newton, to a new owner. In total, three
generations of the Dennis–Newton family lived in the house. The house stands as a
surviving example of a dwelling built for one of Ithaca’s early African-American
residents.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the ILPC finds that the documentation in the draft
National Register nomination form demonstrates that the Dennis-Newton House at 421
N. Albany St. meets criteria for listing on the New York State and National Registers of
Historic Places, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC recommends that the Dennis-Newton House be considered significant at
both the local and national level as the property is associated with the founding of an
organization that has national historic significance, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC recommends the listing of the Dennis-Newton House on the New York
State and National Registers of Historic Places.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: J. Minner
Seconded by: K. Olson
In Favor: D. Kramer, E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian, J. Minner
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: S. Stein, M. McGandy
Vacancies: 0
B. McCracken noted the owner has been performing interior renovations to repair the addition and he
believes he can also repair the roof in the rear.
310-314 N. Cayuga St., DeWitt Park Historic District — Project Schedule Update
B. McCracken reported that he met with the project developer when pre-application materials were
submitted to the Planning Division. The applicant now plans to submit Early Design Review materials
at next month’s Commission meeting. Depending on the results of that meeting, another joint
Commission Planning Board meeting may be scheduled for 6/28/16.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
10 of 14
III. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST
Neil Golder, 203 College Ave., spoke in opposition to the 201 College Avenue project currently being
reviewed by the Planning Board. He believes it falls within the Commission’s purview, since it would
be situated directly across the street from the John Snaith House at 140 College Avenue and would be
two houses away from the Grand View House at 209 College Avenue. The proposed new building
would negatively impact both buildings. He noted the Commission is charged with ensuring “the
harmonious, orderly, and efficient growth and development of the city,” but the project would be
completely out of harmony with the rest of the neighborhood. He urged the Commission to submit
formal comments to the Planning Board.
B. McCracken explained that the Commission treats individual local landmarks differently than it does
buildings in Historic Districts: the surrounding architectural context of an individual landmark is
allowed to change over time. The buildings around the two landmarks were not deemed worthy of
establishing an Historic District; so the project falls outside the Commission’s purview. The
Commission could certainly choose to communicate any concerns to the Planning Board, although many
of the same kinds of concerns have already been communicated to Planning staff.
D. Kramer suggested the Commission submit a letter to the Planning Board, urging it to consider the
context of the surrounding buildings. There were no objections.
B. McCracken indicated he would draft the letter for the Commission’s review.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
110 N. Titus Ave., Henry St. John Historic District — Proposal to Install Fence, Modify Porch
Railing and Steps, and Construct Pergola
Applicant Gary Bucci described the details of the proposal, noting the pergola portion of the original
application would need to be revisited and submitted as a separate application.
D. Kramer asked if the applicant proposes to install an iron fence identical to the one in the rear. G.
Bucci replied, yes. He added that the fence could either extend 16 feet on both sides or extend 8 feet at a
90-degree angle to define the walkway.
S. Gibian asked if the applicant would be able to reuse the existing porch railing. G. Bucci replied, yes.
The dimensions would be exactly the same and it would line up with the door.
S. Gibian expressed concern that moving the stairs would create an odd-looking segment of the porch,
near the bay. G. Bucci replied that he would address that in an aesthetic manner.
S. Gibian indicated he has no issues with the proposal, now that the pergola is no longer a part of it.
B. McCracken suggested the fence configuration be L-shaped to differentiate it as something that was
added.
J. Minner noted she has no strong opinion about the pergola. It would simply have to be compatible
with the Historic District, but with no particularly identifiable style.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
11 of 14
K. Olson indicated she has no problem with the pergola, since it is free-standing and removable.
RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson.
WHEREAS, 110 N. Titus Ave. 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 March 30, 2016, was submitted for review to the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by property owner Gary Bucci, including
the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s)
and Reasons for Changes(s); (2) seven photographs depicting existing conditions and the
proposed alterations; and (3) a diagram of one component of the proposed project, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the entry in the annotated list of properties included within the
Henry St. John Historic District for 110 N. Titus Ave., 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 the
reconfiguring the railing and stairs of a porch, installing a cast and wrought iron fence in
the front yard, leveling an existing stone patio and re-paving an asphalt driveway, and
WHEREAS, based on authority delegated to the Commission Secretary in Section 228-6C of the
Municipal Code and the guidance provided in the City of Ithaca Historic District and
Landmark Design Guidelines, the proposals to level the stone patio and re-pave the
asphalt driveway were approved by the Commission’s Secretary prior to ILPC’s regularly
scheduled meeting on April 12, 2016, 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
April 12, 2016, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and the
proposal:
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.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
12 of 14
As indicated in the individual property entry in the annotated list of properties included
within the Henry St. John Historic District, the Gothic-Revival-Style residence at 110 N.
Titus Ave was constructed in c. 1875.
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 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 #3 Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place,
and use. Changes that create a false sense of historic development, such as adding
conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
undertaken.
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 modifications to the
porch railing and stair, and installation of a cast and wrought iron fence in an L-plan
flanking the front walkway will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter
features and spaces that characterize the property.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
13 of 14
Also with respect to Principle #2, Standard #3 and Standard #9, the porch railing and stair
modifications, and fence installation are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and
architectural features of the property and its environment. The proposed fence will be
differentiated from the old and will not create a false sense of history. Historically the
cast and wrought iron fence would have been installed parallel to the public sidewalk;
therefore, the proposed L-plan installation well identify the salvaged fence as a later
addition to the historic property.
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 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 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: D. Kramer
Seconded by: K. Olson
In Favor: D. Kramer, E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian, J. Minner
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: S. Stein, M. McGandy
Vacancies: 0
V. NEW BUSINESS
318 S. Geneva St., Henry St. John Historic District — Early Design Review
Applicants John Barradas and George Hascup described the proposal, noting the property contains a
two-bay stucco garage built in 1907. It also features a low pitch double-hipped roof, which is
sagging significantly. The front façade is also sagging severely and the walls are pushing out,
creating major cracks. G. Hascup noted that he proposes maintaining the structure, but adding a
third bay. The third bay would replace an existing paved driveway. He plans on adding four or
five feet to the exterior wall and install a simple barn gable roof. He noted all surrounding
properties have garages, most of which have two stories.
D. Kramer asked if the scale of the new bay would be the same as the other two bays. G. Hascup
replied, yes. J. Barradas added that details, like the trim, would be provided with the application.
S. Gibian asked what would be done with the second story. G. Hascup replied that it would house a
storage loft with windows.
J. Minner noted that contributing structures must ordinarily be maintained in their original form,
which the proposal does not do. She asked if the applicants considered stepping back the new bay
of the garage. G. Hascup replied that there is no room to do that.
ILPC Minutes
May 10, 2016
14 of 14
J. Minner noted, even if the applicants only stepped it back a few inches, the outline of the original
building could be maintained. G. Hascup replied he believes that should be feasible.
K. Olson agreed with J. Minner’s suggestion to step the new bay back, so the original building
could still be distinguished.
B. McCracken remarked some alternate siding and cladding material could also help differentiate it.
K. Olson cautioned applicants that a barn shape would not have been contemporaneous to the time
of construction.
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
As moved by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson, Commission members approved the following meeting
minutes, with one minor modification.
April 12, 2016 (Regular Meeting)
VII. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
FORUM 2016, National Alliance of Preservation Commissions: July 27-30, 2016, Mobile, AL
B. McCracken provided Commission members with information on the conference.
201 Stewart Ave. — Window Replacement Proposal
B. McCracken reported that he met with a property owner who proposes to replace a basement
window. The owner received a Zoning Variance for an additional bedroom in the basement, but the
existing window is too small for egress. The owner has proposed a fiberglass window, but the
opening would have to be enlarged. B. McCracken asked if the Commission would be amenable to
his approving it at the staff level, at the applicant’s request.
K. Olson responded she would not be inclined to do that, given it involves a primary façade.
B. McCracken noted he would ask the applicant to appear before the Commission.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned by consensus at 8:02 p.m. by Chair Finegan.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission