HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-ILPC-2019-10-10Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
1
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Minutes — October 10, 2019
Present:
Ed Finegan, Chair
David Kramer, Vice Chair
Stephen Gibian, Member
M.M. McDonald
(arrived at 6:30 p.m.)
Katelin Olson, Member
Avi Smith, Member
(arrived at 6:22 p.m.)
Susan Stein, Member
Donna Fleming, Common Council
Liaison
Bryan McCracken, Historic
Preservation Planner
Anya Harris, City of Ithaca staff
Chair E. Finegan called the meeting to order at 5:34 p.m.
I. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 2 Ridgewood Road, Cornell Heights Historic District – Proposal to Demolish a
Basement Entrance Enclosure and Construct New Concrete Entrance Stairs.
Applicant Ray Canzler and engineer Gary Bush appeared in front of the Commission in order to
outline the proposal to remove the basement entrance enclosure and construct new entrance
stairs. The goal is to bring it up to code, with both handrails and guardrails, and stairs that meet
the width and rise requirements. He said that they were cited for a deteriorated roof, and when
they went in for a building permit, they determined that the shed roof was put on without a
permit. Upon looking at historical photos, they determined that the roof was not original.
K. Olson asked if they are required to bring it up to code.
R. Canzler said once they touch it, they have to bring it up to code, and the owners want to do the
work on the stairs for improved safety.
S. Gibian asked why they have to bring the stairs down and around to the other side of the
building.
R. Canzler said there is a deck with another exit door back there, and they want to provide
emergency egress other than down a steep hill.
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by S. Stein, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed the
Public Hearing on a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
2
RESOLUTION: Moved by S. Stein, seconded by D. Kramer.
WHEREAS, 2 Ridgewood Road is 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 September 23, 2019, was submitted for review to the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) by Ray Canzler on behalf of
property owner Phi Delta Theta Fraternity, including the following: (1) two
narratives respectively titled Description of Proposed Change(s) and Reasons for
Changes(s); (2) two photographs showing original (c. 1922) conditions and existing
conditions; (3)an annotated photograph outlining the proposed scope of work; (4) a
letter from the City of Ithaca Building Division to Shipman and Goodman LLP,
dated September 30, 2019, regarding the subject property and area of proposed
work; (5) six sheets of drawings by SPEC Consulting, dated September 10, 2019 and
titled “Title Sheet” (T1), “Stair Layout” (A1), “Roof Plan” (A2), Elevations (A3),
“Sections” (A4), and “3D Views” (A5), and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form for 2
Ridgewood Road, and the City 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
demolition of a basement entrance enclosure at the southeast corner of the building
and the construction of a concrete entrance stair, 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 October 10, 2019, 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.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
3
As indicated in the New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form, 2
Ridgewood Road was designed by William McLeish Dunbar and constructed in
1921-1922 for the Phi Delta Theta Fraternity.
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 basement entrance enclosure appears to be an assemblage of elements from
different building campaigns. While some elements suggest an early period of
installation, others are clearly constructed with contemporary building materials. It is
unclear when each component was added.
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 #4 Most properties change over time; those changes that have
acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and
preserved.
Standard #6 Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than
replaced. When the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
4
distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture,
and other visual qualities, and where possible, materials. Replacement of
missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial
evidence.
Standard #9 New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new
work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the
massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity
of the property and its environment.
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 #4, the basement entrance enclosure has not gained
significance in its own right. As illustrated in the c. 1922 photograph submitted with
the application, the oldest appearing elements of enclosure were not a part of the
original completed building. Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps indicate the roof
structures were not added until after 1929.
With respect to Principle #2, Standard #2, and Standard #9, the removal of the
basement entrance enclosure and the construction of new concrete steps 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
concrete stairs are compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features
of the property and its environment.
With respect to Standard #10, the concrete stairs 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 with the
following conditions:
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
5
The applicant shall submit design and/or shop drawings for the proposed hand
and guard railings for consideration and approval by ILPC staff.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: S. Stein
Seconded by: D. Kramer
In Favor: S. Stein, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, K. Olson, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: M.M. McDonald, A. Smith
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. First Presbyterian Church, 315 North Cayuga Street, DeWitt Park Historic District –
Proposal to Install an Illuminated 42- by 50-inch Glass and Metal Sign Cabinet on the
North Elevations.
B. McCracken explained the proposal for signage on behalf of the applicant. He said they want
to be able to install the sign to provide notice of upcoming events and direct visitors to the
entrance. He said they would install into the mortar joints, not the stone.
Several Commission members expressed concerns about the sign being backlit.
S. Stein asked about the size.
B. McCracken said he had discussed it with the administrator of the sign ordinance, and it is in
compliance with what’s allowable.
S. Gibian said the design of the frame looks a little bit overdone.
B. McCracken said he had similar thoughts, but it’s his understanding that the applicants
purchased the sign not knowing what the approvals process was, and that the large pipes down
either side are actually supposed to be posts that go into the ground. The sign ordinance requires
a greater setback than what’s available, so they want to mount it on the building.
D. Kramer suggested a site visit to look at the sign lit up.
ILPC members agreed.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
6
Public Hearing
On a motion by K. Olson, seconded by D. Kramer, Chair E. Finegan opened the Public Hearing.
There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed the
Public Hearing on a motion by D. Kramer, seconded by K. Olson.
Resolution ~ TABLED ~
II. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS OF INTEREST
Chair E. Finegan next opened the public comment period.
Susan Holland, executive director of Historic Ithaca spoke about the Chacona Block. She had
submitted written comments previously. She said they want to see HAB level drawings, and a
complete documentation of the building per the Memorandum of Commitment signed by the
owners. She said she hopes the Commission members will speak in support for the application of
the Collegetown Design Guidelines.
Mary Tomlan, City Historian, spoke about the Chacona Blocak. She said the historical
significance of the building comes from the contributions of the Chacona family, representative
of the Greek immigrants who were so important to the development of various aspects of
commercial life in Collegetown. She said the this building and others on this block marked the
shift in Collegetown away from large boarding houses which had a residential character to ones
with more of a commercial (mixed-use) character. She said that the characteristics of the
building as you come down the hill, particularly at night, are of a first floor brightly lit
community space, with the windows of the upper floors lit with windows of the individual rooms
of personal apartments. She said she hopes that is reflected in the design of the proposed
redevelopment.
Steve Wolf of 608 E. Seneca Street spoke about a neighboring property owner who has many
projects started that have been in progress for years. He said the retaining wall at one property
was supposed to be replaced this fall, but the property owner has recently put up a wooden fence
in its place. He also said that in speaking with the owner, he indicated that he intended to replace
the wall with brick, not stone. He asked the City intervene to move the projects along.
There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair E. Finegan closed the
public comment period.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
7
III. OLD BUSINESS
115 West Green Street, Henry St. John Historic District - Review Railing Design
(pursuant to July 9, 2019 Certificate of Appropriateness condition) & Design
Modifications
Noah Demarest of Stream Collaborative appeared to present a proposal to reconfigure the
alignment of the steps (rotate them 90 degrees due to DOT’s right of way). Demarest also shared
with the Commission the design of the handrail.
Commission members expressed support.
A. Smith arrived at 6:22 p.m.
RESOLUTION: Moved by K. Olson, seconded by D. Kramer.
WHEREAS, 115 West Green Street is located within the Henry St. John Historic District, as designated
under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 2013, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the construction of an accessible ramp to a basement entrance in the
landscape along the east side of property’s north elevation was approved at the regular
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission(ILPC) meeting on July 9, 2019, and
WHEREAS, a condition was placed on that Certificate of Appropriateness requiring the applicant to submit
design and/or shop drawings illustrating the proposed metal handrails… to the ILPC for
review and approval, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has received a submission from Noah Demarest, dated October 1, 2019,
illustrating the proposed handrail and a few minor alterations to the approved ramp layout,
and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed this submission for the purpose of evaluating the impacts of the
proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC finds that the railings and minor site alterations are compatible with the
architectural features of the property and its environment and are approved for use, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that, with the submission of shop drawings and their approval by ILPC staff, the original
condition placed on the project’s Certificate of Appropriateness will be satisfied, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the following conditions placed on the original Certificate of Appropriateness remain
unresolved:
• The applicant shall submit… design specifications for the proposed wood door and
associated door surround modifications to the ILPC for review and approval.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
8
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: K. Olson
Seconded by: D. Kramer
In Favor: S. Stein, D. Kramer E. Finegan, A. Smith, 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.
Clinton House – Review Railings Design (pursuant to September 10, 2019 Certificate of
Appropriateness condition)
Applicant Sara Hayes appeared in front of the ILPC to present updates and shop drawings of the
proposed railings.
S Gibian asked if the uprights will be square or round. (Samples shown were square, but
drawings indicate round.)
Hayes said square is fine.
S. Gibian asked if the decorative ends would be Lamb’s tongue or scrolls.
S. Hayes said either is fine.
M.M. McDonald arrived at 6:30 p.m.
S. Gibian said that he’s glad the 36-inch height was approved by the Building Department.
RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by S. Stein.
WHEREAS, The Clinton House at 116 North Cayuga Street is located within the Clinton Block
Historic District, as designated under Section 228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal
Code in 1980, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-6 of the Municipal Code, an Application for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for the installation of metal handrails on the buildings east portico was
approved at the regular Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission(ILPC) meeting on
September 10, 2019, and
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
9
WHEREAS, a condition was placed on that Certificate of Appropriateness, requiring the applicant to
submit shop drawings for the proposed metal railings for consideration by the Commission at
a future meeting and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has received a submission from Sara Hayes, prepared by AccuFab Inc. and dated
September 23, 2019, illustrating design details of the proposed handrails, and
WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed this submission for the purpose of evaluating the impacts of the
proposal on the subject property and surrounding properties, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the ILPC finds that the railings and minor site alterations are compatible with the
architectural features of the property and its environment and are approved for use, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the original condition placed on the project’s Certificate of Appropriateness has been
satisfied.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: D. Kramer
Seconded by: S. Stein
In Favor: M.M. McDonald, S. Stein, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, A. Smith, K. Olson, S. Gibian
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: 0
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.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
411-415 College Avenue – Presentation and Discussion of Redevelopment Proposal
Scott Whitham and Kate Chesebrough of Whitham Planning & Design, and Steve Hugo of Holt
Architects appeared in front of the Commission to present the redevelopment proposal.
Chair E. Finegan asked if they think the 5-foot setback at floors five and six is sufficient to give
the effect they want on College Ave.
D. Kramer and K. Olson shared his concern.
S. Whitham said they had heard similar comments from the Planning Board, and they are
looking into it.
K. Olson asked what material would be used on the step back.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
10
S. Hugo said right now it’s just labeled masonry, but they have discussed granite or dark
masonry block.
K. Olson said that right now it looks institutional. She also suggested they work on the
articulation and separation of the façades, as right now it looks flat, unlike the historic buildings
at the other end of the block.
D. Kramer said the street-level articulation on College Ave needs work.
S. Gibian said the Chacona Block uses a variety of nice materials, “joyful materials,” at ground
level, but that seems to be missing here.
K. Olson suggested possibly using variety in the windows on the upper floors (and referenced the
Larking Building down the block). She said it might be a way to inject a little more levity into
the upper stories and make them feel less institutional.
M.M. McDonald said that while she understands the idea behind putting the plaque in the
courtyard, it is a somewhat private space, and she wonders if it ought to be more visible from the
public right of way.
S. Stein suggested that they look into ensuring they meet the proposed Green Building Code, and
she asked about the use of natural gas in the building.
S. Hugo said that they were looking into meeting the GBC standards and that he thinks the only
natural gas proposed for use in the building is in the restaurant.
Chair E. Finegan asked if the wall where they are considering displaying the commemorative
plaque is easily accessible from the public way.
Applicants said yes.
S. Whitham said it’s really important to them to create a public, community space in the
courtyard.
S. Gibian asked about the glass to be used.
S. Hugo said that the cantilever is envisioned to be sleek, frameless glass with some spandrel,
and the rest would be a traditional storefront system.
D. Kramer said he finds the upper two stories flat, unpleasant, and boring. He said he wonders
what they could do with it. He said he likes the north and west façades, but he really dislikes the
look of the upper two stories. He asked what the others think.
S. Stein said she thinks it’s too large and the setbacks should be larger, and it’s flat looking.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
11
S. Hugo said he thinks they have been focused on the lower floors and they need to further
develop the materials selections for the top of the building.
B. McCracken said that in addition to reviewing the design of the building, the Planning Board
wants the Commission members to look at the proposed mitigations for the loss of the historic
resource and make recommendations.
The Commission then reviewed possible mitigations including salvaging materials,
documentation, locating the historical marker plaques in a place that is on the public right of
way.
The Commission members asked if the medallions from the building were all going to be put on
display.
S. Hugo said that the two lion’s heads were, but the Greek cross broke into pieces when it was
removed.
A. Smith said that tucking the medallions and historic marker in the corner looks more like a
memorial to the old building than a design element.
K. Olson suggested possibly taking a cast of the medallions or taking some design element from
them and incorporating those into the College Ave façade, saying she’s reluctant to put the
historic materials back out into the elements where they can be damaged.
After some additional discussion, Commission members agreed that it is important to hold the
design of whatever is ultimately built to a very high standard, and follow the Design Guidelines,
because the new building will set the tone for the rest of the block.
East Hill Historic District Projects – Updates
B. McCracken discussed some concerns about three properties located in the East Hill Historic
District: 440 E. Buffalo Street, 603 E. Seneca Street, and 712 E. Seneca Street.
B. McCracken said 440 E. Buffalo Street received a building permit in 2015 to replace the front
porch steps. He said they were monolithic bluestone steps that led up to a grand porch. The
project received a tentative staff-level approval and the monolithic bluestone steps were put back
in place. He said the issue is that the scope of work extended to the entire porch, but the rest of
the work was not completed. There is no record of a building permit for the porch work. He said
that the building last received a Certificate of Compliance in 2018, but it’s not clear why the C of
C was issued, but the inspector has since retired, so he is unavailable to explain.
B. McCracken said the owner filed for a building permit to rebuild the stone wall at 603 E.
Seneca Street in September 2017. Building permits are good for two years. He said the owner
applied for a permit because he had been cited by the City because the wall was leaning out over
the sidewalk and was considered a threat to public safety. Superintendent of Public Works Mike
Thorne issued a permit to remove the wall, as allowed by ordinance, but the property owner is
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
12
then required to file for a permit for work they intend to do to resolve the situation. With the
permit on file, the housing inspector then issued a Certificate of Compliance for the property.
The building permit has since expired, and the Certificate of Compliance will expire at the end of
the month. B. McCracken then said that there were no staff level approvals for this project
because he determined that the ILPC should review the proposal, which was for a stone veneered
concrete wall with the original stone cap on top.
B. McCracken said that for 712 E. Seneca, there is a permit for the repair of the front porch steps
issued in May of last year, so the owner has until May of 2020 to complete the work. There was
a staff level approval for that work, as his proposal was to replace everything in kind, or repair
what was there. He said that what is disturbing is that the owner has received violation letters
related to other issues with the property, going back as far as May of last year. He said City staff
are currently looking into egress requirements for the building and for the porch and steps to be
repaired in order to be in compliance. He said the property does not have a Certificate of
Compliance currently, and the City has not received any response to requests to schedule an
inspection.
B. McCracken said that there were photos circulated earlier in the evening showing a new wood
wall that has been constructed at 603 E. Seneca Street where the stone wall once stood. He said it
seems that the property owner isn’t going to willingly come into compliance. The City has tried
to get him to do the work without issuing a violation letter, but with the installation of this fence,
and his reluctance to do any work, we are planning to cite him for these violations and start a
formal compliance procedure.
S. Stein asked if the City can deny him a Certificate of Occupancy so that he can’t rent out his
apartments.
B. McCracken said he’s asked that question previously, and if the buildings are deemed unsafe,
they can require tenants to move out.
K. Olson asked what’s going on at 712 E. Seneca. She said she went by recently and saw the lift
in the yard.
B. McCracken said he thinks they are rebuilding the porch roof, but he’s not sure because that’s
the property that has no building permit.
After some additional discussion, B. McCracken said that the building inspector would be
sending the owner a violation letter in the near future, informing him of what needs to be done to
correct the issues and giving him a deadline to complete the work. Next steps could include legal
action and possibly fines.
V. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
National Alliance of Preservation Commissions CAMP Training
Several sessions will be offered around Upstate New York in October. B. McCracken reminded
the members that the Planning Department would cover the registration cost.
Approved by ILPC: 10, December 2019
13
VII. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission