CAZENOVIA — On April 26, at 6 p.m., the Cazenovia Town Board will hold a special meeting to continue its years-long discussion on the future of the town offices, which are currently housed in the historic Gothic Cottage at 7 Albany St.

Listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the Gothic Cottage — or “Bob-O-Link” — was constructed in 1847 as a home for Henry Ten Eyck and his wife, Elizabeth.

Today, the building’s interior configuration reflects its Gothic Revival-style architecture and original use as a house; most of the cottage’s rooms are small and impractical for gatherings of multiple people at a time.

During town board meetings, for example, the board members sit facing each other at a table in the west parlor while members of the public sit in what was once a hallway or in the adjoining east parlor. The separation between the board and the public, combined with the doorways between the two parlors, can make seeing and hearing the meetings difficult.

According to Town Supervisor Bill Zupan, the existing offices and limited storage space also present issues.

“If you go into the town office, we’ve got filing cabinets all over the place; we even have files stuck in the fireplace near [Deputy Town Clerk] Sue Wightman’s desk,” Zupan said. “[Our clerks] are making it work, but it really isn’t suited for office space. Plus, we just hired a new assistant clerk, so now there are three of them in there. . .”

The town has been considering renovation of the Gothic Cottage since 2006, when a capital reserve fund, called the “future of the town office fund,” was established.

Throughout the years, the town has had numerous discussions about whether to move the town offices to an offsite location or modify the Gothic Cottage to remain onsite.

“It’s a question of whether we want to stay and remodel the Gothic Cottage in some way to try to make it work for the next 50 years or build new where we think we can put in everything we need for the next 50 years,” said Zupan.

The supervisor estimates that either option would likely cost anywhere from $2 million to $2.5 million.

According to Zupan, the current capital reserve fund balance is at least $900,000. If the board decides to renovate the Gothic Cottage, the town will receive another $200,000 in funding through a grant from Senator Rachel May’s Office.

“If we build new, that $200,000 goes away,” Zupan noted.

In 2013, the town board selected the Syracuse-based architectural firm Holmes, King, Kallquist & Associates (HKK) as its lead architectural consultant on a Gothic Cottage renovation assessment project.

HKK was tasked with reviewing the building and all the issues that would need to be addressed to make it structurally sound, technologically modern, accessible, and functional as a municipal office space. The firm completed its assessment in 2014 and presented the town with multiple renovation design options that May.

“Plan C was the option the town board liked best, and that’s what we have been dealing with [since],” said Zupan. “Everybody still likes that the best as far as staying in the building goes.”

HKK’s “Plan C”

According to Zupan, Plan C, which has been modified since its introduction, currently calls for the construction of a public meeting space at the rear of the building (the north side); the use of the two front rooms — the east and west parlors — as the clerks’ offices; an elevator to facilitate access to the second floor, which houses the offices of the assessor, bookkeeper, and the supervisor’s assistant; and a larger office for the codes enforcement officer.

“Right now, [our codes officer] is cubbyholed in the back area where the back entrance is, so he has no privacy,” Zupan said. “Plus, he would have filing cabinets and a table so he could meet with clients.”

Throughout the years, the conversation surrounding the future of the town offices has been ongoing but sporadic.

“It starts and stops,” noted Zupan.

In 2016, for example, the town board decided to suspend its work on deciding whether to remodel or seek a new town hall location until a decision was made regarding a potential town/village consolidation.

The topic was put on the back-burner again during the COVID-19 pandemic when the cost of building materials skyrocketed.

“We sort of put a hold on it for the last two years,” Zupan said on March 11, 2022. “If building supplies come down, I think it’s time we do something.”

Cazenovia Heritage’s “Compromise Plan”

In response to HKK’s Plan C, Cazenovia Heritage — a community organization dedicated to conserving the area’s cultural resources — conducted its own investigation into potential Gothic Cottage renovations.

Rather than arguing for or against moving the town offices to an offsite location, Cazenovia Heritage decided to first determine whether it would be feasible to meet the town’s needs at the current location. If it was deemed feasible, the organization would then determine if Plan C was the best approach. If it was deemed unfeasible to remain, the various offsite solutions would be considered.

According to an October 2021 special edition of the Cazenovia Heritage newsletter, “The Advocate,” the analysis determined that it was economically, technically, and operationally feasible to remain onsite, meet the town’s requirements, and address public concerns only if changes were made to the town’s preferred plan.

After examining Plan C, Cazenovia Heritage believed the proposal called for excessive and unnecessary demolition and destruction, while also failing to meet what the organization understood to be requirements of the project, such as maintaining or enhancing work adjacencies and protecting historically sensitive spaces.

Cazenovia Heritage asked Carl Stearns, an architect and preservation planner and a Cazenovia Heritage board member, to develop an alternative design incorporating the desired changes.

According to Cazenovia Heritage President Anne Ferguson, the alternative design was intended to meet the town’s requirements and address the concerns of people who felt the requirements could be met only by building new offices offsite, as well the concerns of those who wanted to remain onsite, either with or without modifying the Gothic Cottage.

“For this reason, it was called the ‘Compromise Plan,’” Ferguson said. “It combines the benefits of a new building while protecting the architecture and integrity of the existing Gothic Cottage and [it] would keep the Town Offices at 7 Albany St.”

According to the October 2021 newsletter, the plan would provide a large meeting room for 35 attendees, small conference rooms, a common lunchroom, and offices for the codes enforcement officer, town clerk, and assistant town clerk. It would also minimize heavy traffic/high impact in historically sensitive areas, minimize structural or cosmetic changes to the interiors, maintain or enhance adjacencies for staff productivity, and ensure accessibility for physically challenged individuals.

Like Plan C, the Compromise Plan calls for the construction of an addition to the rear of the building for a new public meeting space. However, the proposed addition is larger to also accommodate two large offices for the town clerks and to avoid converting the front two rooms into office space. The front rooms would instead become small conference rooms or public spaces for meetings of non-profits, chamber of commerce displays, and other tourism or cultural exhibits.

Ferguson describes the plan as a clean design calling for no demolition, no destruction, and only minor alterations to the existing Gothic Cottage.

“Placed on the west side of the lot, [the addition] provides an attractive and true entrance to the town offices, with easy public access and a drop-off point,” Ferguson said. “The Compromise Plan would not require any temporary relocation of the offices, while Plan C would. . . Plan C places the most intensive, high-use functions — the clerks — in the most historically sensitive spaces — the front parlors. This is not adaptive re-use but a use that would hasten the deterioration of these spaces. And to make those into accessible workspaces, it requires permanent alterations, demolition of existing rooms, removal of casings and floors, and drilling through plaster walls and ceilings to install lights, telecommunications cabling, etc. Plan C also destroys the original architect’s line-of- sight design — from front door to back garden — while it carves a new back door into the wall of the house to be yet another difficult public entrance. All of this is costly, unnecessary, and destroys the integrity of the building.”

In August 2021, Cazenovia Heritage presented a preliminary plan to the town board.

The organization’s request for the town to fund the translation of the conceptual design into elevations and floor plans was denied.

“The Town of Cazenovia cannot fund a private organization, such as Cazenovia Heritage,” explained Zupan.

After the board declined to provide the funding, Cazenovia Heritage hired the architectural firm QPK Design, LLP to develop the elevations and drawings based on the plan.

“These elevations and plans were developed in September [2021] and reviewed with planning & zoning board members, town employees, and town board members over the next few months – receiving favorable support,” said Ferguson.

In Dec. 2021, Cazenovia Heritage requested that the town board adopt the Compromise Plan as the sole onsite option to be evaluated against a “To Be Announced” offsite location.

According to Zupan, that same month, the town board voted against Cazenovia Heritage’s plan, in favor of moving forward with either some version of Plan C or building a new town hall at an offsite location.

“[Cazenovia Heritage’s] plan is to leave the front of the Gothic Cottage as a museum — to not touch it at all and move everything to the back,” said Zupan. “I just don’t think it’s doable. . . We have to be careful with town money, and I can’t see leaving huge spaces open just as a museum.”

PACNY input

On Jan 22, 2022, Andrew Roblee, president of the Preservation Association of Central New York (PACNY), submitted a letter to Zupan advocating for the town’s adoption of the Compromise Plan over Plan C.

Roblee begins the letter by explaining that to be listed on the NRHP, a property must be shown to be significant under the National Register criteria and have “integrity,” which is defined by the National Parks Service as the ability of a property to convey its significance.

The Gothic Cottage, Roblee explains, is notable for its extremely high level of integrity in its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

“In other words, the Gothic Cottage is an [incredibly] intact and historically significant building only insofar as its original form and design, both interior and exterior, are maintained,” he states.

Roblee goes on to explain that PACNY recommends the Compromise Plan for three specific reasons.

First, he states, the plan preserves the integrity of the building by avoiding irreversible demolitions and alterations to its interior and historic fabric. Second, it provides a higher level of handicap accessibility, and third, it meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for New Additions to Historic Buildings.

“In contrast, ‘Plan C’ would make irreversible changes to the overall form, massing, and volumes of the building when viewed from the outside and make permanent changes to the historic features inside through demolition,” Roblee states.

He also warns that “such a drastic change to the integrity of the building” could result in the removal of the Gothic Cottage from the NRHP, which would disqualify the building from any current or future grant opportunities or other economic benefits associated with the NRHP listing.

During the town board’s February work session, Ferguson presented PACNY’s letter and expressed her belief that HKK’s plan would fail to meet basic preservation standards, such as those defined by New York’s State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).

On March 14, 2022, Zupan responded to Ferguson’s comments, stating that the town is confident that if it decides to move forward with HKK’s plan, the project will meet the state preservation standards.

“HKK has done a large amount of historical renovations,” Zupan said. “If we do any renovations in the Gothic Cottage, HKK has assured us that they can meet SHPO requirements.”

CPF input

In a Feb. 8, 2022 letter to the town board, the Cazenovia Preservation Foundation (CPF) Board of Directors encourages the town to maintain its offices at the Gothic Cottage and to protect the building as a historical architectural resource.

“The Town will have to commit substantial financial resources to secure a modernized Town office and meeting space,” the letter states. “We strongly encourage the Town to invest those dollars in the restoration and renovation of the Gothic Cottage, a building that has retained its unique character and value within the Cazenovia streetscape for 175 years. When considering return on investment, the Gothic Cottage is the clear choice for Cazenovia.”

Additionally, CPF offers insight into its review of both onsite plans.

“CPF appreciates many of the architectural elements of the [Compromise Plan], such as the attractive glass entry which clearly defines the public-access entry to the building and the rooflines intended to integrate more seamlessly with the front of the building than those proposed by HKK, while still clearly delineating the historic and new portions of the structure,” the letter says. “In this regard, the Cazenovia Heritage plan is superior to Plan C.”

The board also notes that because the addition proposed in the Compromise Plan is larger, the street view and impact on parking would need to be considered. The comparative costs of the two proposals would also require careful consideration.

According to the letter, CPF believes that with careful attention to detail in drafting the final plans and ample input from interested parties, both plans could be carried out in such a way as to protect the building’s historical façade and important interior architectural features.

Special meeting

During the April 26 special meeting, the town board will begin weighing the advantages and constraints of both Plan C and building at an offsite location, such as along Route 20 or in New Woodstock.

During the meeting, the public will have the opportunity to listen to the board’s conversation; however, at that point, they will not be invited to provide input.

“We are going to keep having discussions among the town board to try to come up with changes to the HKK plan and [decide] what we would want for a new [offsite] building,” explained Zupan. “When we get things to where the town board feels comfortable, we will have public meetings and let the public give input on what they would like to see us do.”