HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2017-12-19 Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Minutes—December 19, 2017
Present:
Ed Finegan, Chair Megan McDonald, Member Bryan McCracken, Historic
David Kramer, Vice Chair Katelin Olson, Member Preservation Planner
(left at 7:17) Susan Stein, Member Anya Harris, Staff
Stephen Gibian, Member
Jennifer Minner, Member
Chair Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 111-115 The Knoll, Cornell Heights Historic District–Proposal to Reconfigure
Parking Areas and Install Hardscape Improvements
Noah Demarest, architect and landscape architect, and Kate Krueger,project manager(both with
STREAM Collaborative), and applicant Karl Johnson, on behalf of the Chesterton House,
appeared in order to provide details of the proposed project at 111-115 The Knoll.
Demarest and Krueger noted a minor revision to the site plan, the addition of a small ramp
(elevated sidewalk) leading to the new entry at the southwest corner of 111 The Knoll,per the
revised drawings,provided.
Demarest asked the ILPC to examine hardscape revisions, noting that though the configuration
of the parking lot will change slightly, there will be no net change in the number of spaces. He
also explained that the plan involves removing several trees in order to create a unified outdoor
space, a terrace linking the two buildings,noting that now both properties have the same owner,
the plan is to consolidate the lots.
He also said that they will be appearing in front of the PDB later this evening for a site plan
review after they leave the ILPC meeting.
E. Finegan asked about the one space being added to the lot by 111, and asked what is there now.
The applicants answered that it's currently a small grassy area between the two lots.
S. Gibian asked the applicants to review the tree removal plans.
K. Krueger said they are currently planning removal of 10 evergreens (Norway spruces) along
the current property line. Removal is planned for two reasons, one, to foster connection between
the two buildings, and two,because of concerns about potential for safety hazards as the trees
approach their end of useful life.
1
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
S. Gibian inquired about possibility of leaving some of the trees, Demarest and Krueger
responded that presently, the plan is to remove them all. Krueger explained that the historic
purpose of the trees was to separate the two houses, and now they are trying to join the two lots.
K. Olson asked about replacing a comparable number of trees elsewhere on the site. K. Krueger
said they would consider that, and noted that they are already planning on adding new plantings
on the site, although"not sure if it's exactly in-kind."
After a brief discussion, B. McCracken noted that the ILPC does not usually have purview over
planting plans, except when plantings are included to hide mechanicals, for example.
Applicants noted that the Planning Board will be reviewing the planting plan.
S. Gibian asked if they planned to preserve the round stone feature.
Applicants said they were not familiar with it,but N. Demarest said, "It sounds like something
we would definitely want to keep, either in place or by finding a better place for it."
E. Finegan asked the applicants to discuss the lampposts.
K. Krueger said they want to use stone piers with light fixture on top along the driveway to
create a sense of entry. These should be tall enough to deter vandalism to the fixtures themselves.
N. Demarest said that the clients have also raised some concerns about The Knoll being so dark,
and that they will also install some light posts along the path to assist students walking back from
campus after dark.
K. Krueger added that after the first few fixtures on stone piers at the end of the driveway, the
rest of the fixtures will be on posts, adding that they are all dark-sky compliant, with LED
fixtures that direct the beam down,not resulting in light pollution.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by Minner, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by D. Kramer, and
seconded by K. Olson.
RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Olson, seconded by D. Kramer.
WHEREAS, 111 and 115 The Knoll are located within the Cornell Heights Historic District, as
designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 1989, and as
listed on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places in 1989, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness, dated December 1, 2017,was submitted for review to the Ithaca
2
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Noah Demarest on behalf of
property owners Ross Turnbull and Sheryl Kimes of 111 The Knoll and Chesterton
House, Inc. of 115 The Knoll,including the following: (1) two narratives respectively
titled Description of Proposed Chanj4e(s) and Reasons for Changes(s); (2) a sheet of
photographs documenting existing conditions; (3) a"Layout Plan" dated 11/29/17
showing the locations of the proposed changes; and (4), a "Details" drawing dated
11/29/17 illustrating the proposed alterations, and
WHEREAS, the applicants submitted for review to the ILPC a revised "Layout Plan" dated
December 12, 2017 at their regularly scheduled meeting on December 19, 2017, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for
111 The Knoll and 115 The Knoll, and the Citv of Ithaca's Cornell Heights Historic
District Summary Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves the
installation of Bluestone and stone dust walkways, a patio and a terrace, the
reconfiguration of the parking area,and the installation of a trash enclosure, two
stone base light posts, two bike racks, and a ramp leading of the east entrance of the
proposed addition to 111 The Knoll, 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 December 19,2017,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 Cornell Heights Historic District Summary
Statement, the period of significance for the area now known as the Cornell Heights
Historic District is 1898-1937.
As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, 111 The
Knoll was constructed between 1900 and 1901 for Robert G. Allen, section director
for the U.S. Weather Bureau. The residence was designed by Clarence Martin, a
graduate and later the dean of the Cornell University School of Architecture, and
constructed by the locally prominent construction company of Driscoll Bros., Inc.
As indicated in the New York Building Structure Inventory Form, the Arts and
Crafts Style residence at 115 The Knoll was designed by the locally prominent
architecture firm of Gibb and Waltz and constructed in between 1908 and 1909.
3
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Constructed within the period of significance of the Cornell Heights Historic District
and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing element of the
Cornell Heights Historic District.
The project under consideration involves landscape and hardscape improvements
associated with the consolidation of the 111 and 115 The Knoll parcels to facilitate
the combined use of the two residences.
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.
Principle #3 New construction located within an historic district shall be
compatible with the historic character of the district within which it is
located.
Standard #2 The historic character of a property will be retained and
preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and
spaces that characterize a property will be avoided.
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity
of the property and its environment.
Standard #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.
4
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2,and Standard #9, the reconfiguration of
parking spaces and the installation of walkways, a patio and a terrace,light posts, and
trash enclosure will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter features and
spaces that characterize the property.
Also with respect to Principle #2, Principle #3, and Standard #9, the proposed
reconfigured parking,patio, terrace,light posts and trash enclosure are compatible
with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property and its
environment.
With respect to Standard#10, the proposed hardscape features can be removed in
the future without impairment of the essential form and integrity of the historic
property and its environment.
RESOLVED, that,based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic,historical, or architectural significance of the Cornell
Heights 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: K. Olson
Seconded by: D. Kramer
In Favor: J. Minner, S. Stein,D. Kramer,E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: M.M. McDonald
Vacancies: 0
Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner's representative to bring to the attention
of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans,including but not limited to changes
required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as
construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop
work order or revocation of the building permit.
B. 114 Highland PI.,East Hill Historic District— Proposal to Install a Ladder on an
Existing Fire Escape.
Nicole Freelove, on behalf of applicant Pamela Johnston, explained that they want to add the
ladder to comply with State and local fire codes.
5
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Chair E. Finegan, asked the ILPC to share any concerns or questions.
S. Gibian said that it's unfortunate that it's on the front of the building,but that he looked for
another location and could find none better.
S. Stein asked if there were any security issues with the ladder.
B. McCracken said that as they have to install it to conform with codes, so as long as there are
locks on the windows, the building is sufficiently secure.
S. Gibian said that with re-bar rungs, it doesn't seem like it would be very comfortable to climb.
B McCracken said that maybe that's a good thing ... (Laughter all around.)
Chair E. Finegan asked if there were any other comments or problems with the proposed ladder.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by S. Stein, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no public comments, the Public Hearing was closed on a motion by K. Olson, and
seconded by D. Kramer.
RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by J. Minner.
WHEREAS, 114 Highland Pl. is located in the East Hill Historic District, as designated under
Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 1988, and as listed on the New
York State and National Registers of Historic Places in 1986, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness, dated November 28, 2017,was submitted for review to the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by property owner Pamela
Johnston,including the following: (1) two narratives respectively titled Description
of Proposed Change(sl and Reasons for Changes(s); and (2) an illustration of the
proposed change from Javier E. Rosa at Taitem Engineering, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has also reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form
for 114 Highland Pl., and the City of Ithaca's East Hill Historic District Summary
Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s�, the project involves the
installation of a ladder to grade on an existing fire escape,located on the north side
of the east elevation, and
6
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
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 December 19,2017,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 East Hill Historic District Summary Statement,
the period of significance for the area now known as the East Hill Historic District is
1830-1932.
As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, the Colonial
Revival residence at 114 Highland PI was constructed in ca. 1920.
Constructed within the period of significance of the East Hill Historic District and
possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing element of the East
Hill Historic District.
114 Highland PI is classified as a multiple-family dwelling and the fire escape is a
building-code-required means of egress for the upper-story units. The proposed
ladder is required by recent updates to the New York State Building Code.
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 228-611 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.
7
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Standard#2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved.
The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and spaces that
characterize a property will be avoided.
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity
of the property and its environment.
Standard#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.
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2,and Standard #9, the installation of a
ladder on an existing fire escape will not remove distinctive materials and will not
alter features and spaces that characterize the property.
Also with respect to Principle #2, and Standard #9, the proposed ladder is
compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property
and its environment.
With respect to Standard#10, the proposed ladder can be removed in the future
without impairment of the essential form and integrity of the historic property and
its environment.
RESOLVED, that, based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic,historical, or architectural significance of the 114
Highland Pl. and the East Hill Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be
it further,
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal
meets criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: D. Kramer
Seconded by: J. Minner
In Favor: J. Minner, S. Stein,D. Kramer,E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: M.M. McDonald
Vacancies: 0
8
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner's representative to bring to the attention
of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans,including but not limited to changes
required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as
construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop
work order or revocation of the building permit.
C. 159 Central Ave., Morrill Hall, Cornell Arts Quad Historic District—Proposal to
Replace Slate Roof Tiles In-kind,Install a Standing Seam Metal Roof, Repair
Deteriorated and Damaged Metal and Wood Trim and Features, Replace
Deteriorated Windows, and Install Life-safety and Mechanical-safety Equipment..
Associate University Architect James Shermeta and Project Manager Chris Davenport from
Cornell, and Consulting Architect Doug Arena from Bell & Spena appeared on behalf of Cornell
University and detailed the proposed project at Morrill Hall.
D. Arena discussed the history of Morrill Hall, constructed 1866-1868, three stories with an attic
and a mansard roof. It was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1966, and faces the Arts
Quad Historic District.
D. Arena said the project will involve replacing the upper low-slope roof(modified bitrumen
asphaltic membrane)with a standing seam metal roof(restoring it to how it appeared prior to the
1980s) and repairing the hexagonal slate tiles on the mansard roof with an in-kind replacement
(new slate, identical). The applicants noted that there are currently two sizes of slate on the roof
and sought input as to which size to use for the replacement tiles.
Additionally, there are 38 single-hung dormer windows around the mansard roof, all (in theory)
openable, only some of which are operable and many of which are water damaged, that would be
replaced(in-kind) over the course of this project.
D. Arena noted that the scope of work would also include repairs to the cornice,painting the
dentils and moldings (thought to be original) and replacing all the copper gutters and downspouts
in kind.
He also said that the project would involve localized repairs, re-pointing and flashing around the
chimneys, as well.
The project would also include a snow retention system, installation of a lightning protection
system, and a fall-arrest system.
K. Olson noted that their report said about 25 % of the slate was failing, and asked if that was
concentrated in any area. D. Arena answered that it does not appear to be in one area, and is
across the entire roof.
S. Stein asked if they had looked into saving any of the slate.
D. Arena responded that the current plan does not involve salvaging existing because of the way
9
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
it was nailed tight so they anticipate a high percent of breakage when it is removed. He also cited
weathering (causing a mismatch between the old and the new) as a concern.
Chair E. Finegan, asked if the existing slate is from Pennsylvania.
D. Arena said that yes, that's what they think.
Chair E. Finegan asked if they don't hold up as well.
D. Arena said that some of the slate from Pennsylvania contains mineral deposits that result in
faster weathering and shaling. He said that they will be getting S-1 slate from either Vermont or
New York for the project.
D. Arena continued with a discussion of the plan to replace the windows. They would be using
Marvin replacements manufactured to match what is there currently. The new windows would
have removable panels to accommodate window AC units. J. Shermetta added that the project
would also include an extra"attic stock" of regular glass panels (available when/if the
mechanicals of the building are upgraded and window AC units are no longer needed).
Additional discussion, regarding windows, downspouts, and several other elements of the
building followed.
Public Hearing
On a motion by S. Gibian, seconded by Minner, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no public comments, on a motion by K. Olson, seconded by Kramer, the Public
Hearing was closed.
RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Gibian, seconded by K. Olson.
WHEREAS, Morrill Hall at 159 Central Ave. is located within the Cornell Arts Quad Historic
District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in
1990;in 1965 Morrill Hall was designated a National Historic Landmark and was
individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1966, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate
of Appropriateness, dated November 28, 2017,was submitted for review to the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Chris Davenport on behalf
of property owner Cornell University,including the following: (1) two narratives
respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for Changes(s);
(2) a document titled Cornell University,Morrill Hall,Roof Replacement: Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission Submission, authored by Douglas Arena,AIA
RRC from Bell &Spina,Architects and dated November 28, 2017;and (3) seven
sheets of architectural drawings from the same architecture firm and dated
November 28, 2017, and
10
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for
Morrill Hall, and the City of Ithaca's Cornell Arts Quad Historic District Summary
Statement, and
WHEREAS, as stated in the narrative Description of Proposed Change(s), the project involves:
(1) in-kind replacement of the hexagonal slate roof tiles on the lower slopes of the
mansard roofs; (2) installation of terne coated (100% tin) stainless steel, 16"wide, 1"
architectural double lock standing seam metal roof panels and non-penetrating
clamp-style snow pads on the upper slope of the principal block's mansard roof and
a 2-ply SBS modified bitumen roof low slope membrane to upper slope of the low
roof s mansard roof; (3) repair sections of damaged metal cornice, replace the
deteriorated lining of the integral gutters,replace in-kind damaged copper
downspouts and relocate the north gutter; (4) repair and/or replace in-kind
deteriorated dormer features; (5) replace all non-historic dormer windows with
Marvin-brand,wood windows; (6) install a rail style fall restraint system on the west
side of the principal block's roof ridge and a lightning protection system; (7)
localized repairs to and reflashing of the north and south chimneys; and (8) remove
two rooftop mechanical exhausts, 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 December 19,2017,now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC has made the following findings of fact concerning the property and
the proposal:
The period of significance for the area now known as the Cornell Arts Quad is
identified in the City of Ithaca's Cornell Arts Quad Historic District Summary
Significance Statement as 1868-1919.
As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, construction
of Morrill Hall began in 1866 and was completed in 1868. Designed by the Buffalo
architectural firm of H.M.Wilcox and C.K. Porter and constructed of locally
quarried stone,Morrill Hall was the first building constructed on Cornell University's
campus and is one of the three buildings comprising"Stone Row." It is named for
Justin S. Morrill,Vermont Congressman and author of the Morrill Land Grant Act
of 1862 that allowed,in part, for the establishment of the university.
Constructed within the period of significance of the Cornell Arts Quad Historic
District and possessing a high level of integrity, the property is a contributing
element of the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District.
11
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
In consideration of this and all approvals of proposals for alterations, new
construction, or demolition in historic districts, the ILPC must determine that
the proposed exterior work will not have a substantial adverse effect on the
aesthetic, historical, or architectural significance and value of either the
landmark or, if the improvement is within a district, of the neighboring
improvements in such district. In considering architectural and cultural value,
the Commission shall consider whether the proposed change is consistent with
the historic value and the spirit of the architectural style of the landmark or
district in accordance with Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code. In making
this determination, the Commission is guided by the principles set forth in
Section 228-6B of the Municipal Code, as further elaborated in Section 228-6C,
and by the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and in this
case specifically the following principles and Standards:
Principle#2 The historic features of a property located within,and contributing
to the significance of,an historic district shall be altered as little as possible and
any alterations made shall be compatible with both the historic character of the
individual property and the character of the district as a whole.
Standard#2 The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved.
The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features and spaces that
characterize a property will be avoided.
Standard #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than
replaced. When the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
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
slate roof tileswill remove distinctive materials but will not alter features and spaces
that characterize the property. As noted in the documentation provided by the
applicant, the slate roof tiles on the lower slopes of the mansard roof vary in size;
some sections are clad in 8"wide tiles with 9 '/2" exposure while other sections are
clad in 12"wide tiles with 10" exposures. It is unclear whether this conditions
represents the historic configuration or is the result of an earlier partial replacement
campaign. Based on the concentration of 8"wide slate tiles on the west and north
elevations and the size of the slate tiles on White Hall, the ILPC believes the lower
slope of Morrill Hall's mansard roof was originally clad in 8"wide slate tiles with 9
'/z" exposures. Therefore, the replacement of all tiles with 8"wide tiles as proposed
12
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
by the applicant will restore the roof to known historic condition,in keeping with
Standard #6, further addressed below.
With respect to Principle#2 and Standard#6,as shown in the submitted photographs
and described in the submitted supporting documentation, the severity of the
deterioration of the slate tiles and supporting roof structure requires their replacement.
The proposed new work will match the old in design,color,texture,material and other
visual qualities. In making this determination, the ILPC considered the percentage of
slate roof tiles in the submitted photographs that exhibited signs of spauling or
bedding plane delamination, a type of deterioration that requires replacement. The
ILPC also considered the required repairs to the roof sheathing and underlayment,
which necessitates the removal of all roof tiles. As noted in the submitted materials,
the slate tiles are nailed tight to the roof deck, making it difficult to remove them
without causing damage or breakage. At least half of the slate tiles are expected to
break during removal.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed 8"wide slate tiles
are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property
and its environment.
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2,and Standard #9, the installation of
terne-coated stainless steel, standing seem metal roof panels will not remove
distinctive materials and will not alter features and spaces that characterize the
property. As documented in the submitted historic photograph,Morrill Hall had a
standing seem metal roof during the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District's period of
significance; therefore; the installation of a new metal roof that replicates the
appearance of the historic roof material is inherently compatible with the historic
aesthetic quality of the building and district.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed metal roof system
is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the property
and its environment
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2,and Standard #9, the replacement of the
dormer windows will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter features and
spaces that characterize the property. As indicated in the submitted materials and
supported by pictorial and physical evidence, the dormer windows were replaced in
the 1970s as part of a 4`'' floor interior renovation project. This work was completed
outside of the period of significance of the Cornell Arts Quad Historic District, and
the windows, therefore, are not considered historic architectural features of the
resource.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed Marvin-brand
wood windows are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features
of the property and its environment.
Finally,with respect to Principle #2,Standard #2, and Standard #9, the installation
of sections of 2-ply modified bitumen roof membrane and lightning and fall
13
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
protection systems,repair and/or in-kind replacements of dormer features, the metal
cornice,integral gutter lining, and downspouts, the removal of roof top exhausts and
the installation of snow pads will not remove distinctive materials and will not alter
features and spaces that characterize the property.
Also with respect to Principle #2 and Standard #9, the proposed roof membrane,
integral gutter lining, downspouts, snow pads and fall and lightning protection
systems are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the
property and its environment.
RESOLVED, that,based on the findings set forth above, the proposal will not have a substantial
adverse effect on the aesthetic,historical, or architectural significance of the Cornell
Arts Quad Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-6, and be it further,
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that the proposal
meets criteria for approval under Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the ILPC approves the Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: S. Gibian
Seconded by: K. Olson
In Favor: J. Minner, S. Stein,D. Kramer,E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: M.M. McDonald
Vacancies: 0
Notice: Failure on the part of the owner or the owner's representative to bring to the attention
of the ILPC staff any deviation from the approved plans,including but not limited to changes
required by other involved agencies or that result from unforeseen circumstances as
construction progresses, may result in the issuance by the Building Department of a stop
work order or revocation of the building permit.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST
Patrick Braga of Visum Development spoke in opposition to designating 311 College Avenue
an historic landmark, explaining that he had recently done some research and created some
designs for the proposed redevelopment of the site.
Mark Kiellman, an owner of The Nines, spoke against designating the building as an historic
landmark. He raised questions regarding the historical or architectural value of the building, and
said he doesn't think it has a lot of architectural value, that it's not particularly incredible. He
said that the patio out front is one of the nice things about the building, but it's not historical,
14
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
saying"We put it in there."He said they've owned the building for 37 years, using it as a
restaurant, bar, and gathering place.
Ken Vineburg, spoke against designation, noting that much of the original wooden firehouse is
gone—the roof, the bell tower, the front of the building. He said that the move to designate the
building has come too late, now that the zoning in Collegetown has changed to favor
development. He said that the building is no more historic now than it ever was and that any
designation should have come before the developer came forth with plans.
There being no further public comments, K. Olson moved, S. Stein seconded, and Chair E.
Finegan closed the public comments.
III. OLD BUSINESS
• 311 College Ave, Old No. 9 Fire Station—Update and Continued Discussion
[correspondence from Littman &Babiarz, Attorneys at Law included]
McCracken, updated the ILPC on the situation with The Nines, saying the developer has returned
with plans for the site. He asked if this changes the ILPC discussion.
He asked, "Is this the right time to bring forth another recommendation, given what happened
with the Chacona Block?"
He said he doesn't think designations should be political,but should instead be driven by ILPC
and Planning Board expertise and recommendations. He noted that the criteria used by the ILPC
and the Planning Board to determine which buildings to designate are currently not applied by
Common Council. He said he looked at the process used by other municipalities and that some
places don't even involve Common Council in the designation process. He asked what actions
the ILPC wants to take now regarding the Nines specifically, as well as any potential changes to
the process for historic designations as laid out in the Landmarks ordinance.
Chair E. Finegan asked how to get ahead of the ball on this issue.
B. McCracken said that a reconnaissance level survey identifying historic structures in
Collegetown was done as part of the Collegetown Plan.
K. Olson said funding is an issue with respect to both surveys and designation efforts. She added
that she is being inundated with comments from people concerned that The Nines building might
be demolished. She also noted that about 6 weeks previously Fox had been quoted in a news
article saying the project was not going forward, which is why people felt they had an
opportunity to move forward with an historic designation.
J. Minner said that funding the ILPC and historic preservation efforts is integral to ensuring that
this work gets done. She expressed her support of McCracken's Memo to the Planning and
Economic Development committee of Common Council. She also suggested perhaps looking
beyond NYS at what municipalities in other states do in terms of designation.
15
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
B. McCracken said his memo is to PEDC of CC, starts a conversation about the procedure for
historic designations, which he says should not be political, and should be owner-blind,
development-blind.
D. Kramer said the ILPC has to get ahead of the developers on these projects, and said Historic
Ithaca needs to get more actively involved. (He departed at 7:17 p.m.)
B. McCracken asked for the Commission's recommendation on the designation of The Nines.
S. Stein said she is in favor of moving forward.
Chair E. Finegan said that at this point, it would make sense to continue.
S. Gibian said he has trouble designating an individual landmark when owners are deeply against
it, and that it is a little late at this point. He also noted that though the owner does not see historic
significance to the patio, he thinks the setback itself is a historically significant feature of the site
in that almost all firehouses have that. He also observed that the squirrels seem to be enjoying the
building at present and wondered if this is another case of demolition by neglect.
Owner Mark Kiellman said their long range plan was always to sell, adding that this situation is a
"difficult change" and that a third or half of its value goes away if the site can't be redeveloped.
Chair E. Finegan, said that as a Commission it's our responsibility to look at this and determine
if it has historic value
S. Gibian said that he thinks the historic portions of the rear are probably not worthy of
designation and that if the vote were held today, he would probably oppose.
K. Olson, spoke of the history of the fire house, the town-gown partnership of developing the
No. Nine Fire Station, and said it has significant history, so she is in favor of designation.
M. M. McDonald arrived at 7:31 p.m.
B. McCracken again asked how the Commission wants him to proceed.
K. Olson said the circumstances around this are less than ideal.
Chair E. Finegan suggested they continue moving forward with making a recommendation to
Planning Board.
K. Olson said that by making a recommendation, the ILPC is inviting public scrutiny and
involvement on the project and encouraging transparency in the process.
16
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
IV. NEW BUSINESS
• Impact of Recent Building Code Revisions on Railings on Historic Properties —
Discussion
B. McCracken reported that it seemed like revisions to codes were requiring railings on all
stairways to be brought up to code, and lots of violations had been coming in,but it turns out the
building inspector had overlooked the part of the code allowing existing railings on properties in
historic districts to be exempted. New projects, however, will need to meet the higher standards.
Additional discussion followed.
• 210 N. Cayuga St., St. John's Episcopal Church, DeWitt Park Historic District— Stained
Glass Window Restoration Staff-Level Approval [restoration proposal from Bovard
Studios included]
B. McCracken said a building inspector noticed the stained glass windows were missing, and
called him to express concern. He contacted the church for information, and it is a true
restoration and subject to a staff level approval. He said he just wanted to alert the ILPC
members so they are not alarmed by the disappearance of the stained glass windows as the
restoration is underway.
• Revisions to the Landmarks Ordinance—Discussion [staff memo included]
B. McCracken, will engage in a conversation with the Planning and Economic Development
Committee, to inquire if they if they want to move forward with revisions to the Landmarks
Ordinance.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On a motion by S. Stein, seconded by M.M. McDonald the minutes from November 14, 2017
were approved unanimously as submitted.
However, S. Gibian reiterated his objection the new secondary dwelling unit building proposed
by the Halperts being called a carriage house.
VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
Susan Holland, new Executive Director of Historic Ithaca, introduced herself to the members of
the Commission, and they welcomed her in her new role.
17
Approved by ILPC: 9,January 2018
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, on a motion by M.M. McDonald, seconded by J. Minner, Chair
E. Finegan adjourned the meeting at 7:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
18