The Landmark Commission voted last week to consider the property at 555 Jericho Turnpike, in Jericho, a landmark. Two applications were submitted - one application includes the structures on the property, the house and barn, and the other application includes the land. Both applications were approved by the Commission pushing the process to the next step which is a hearing set for March 8.

The structures on the 9.25 acres of property are the Ketcham/Underhill house (C. 1800), the Underhill house to the south of the property (built in 1890) and the barn (C. 1800). The Ketcham/Underhill house can be found on the earliest maps of Long Island.

Originally, there was only one application submitted to the Commission to designate the entire 9.25 acres a landmark. Had that application been rejected, there would have been a year waiting period before another application could have been submitted. This was the main reason for dividing the area into two separate applications - the land and the structures. They will now be considered separately so if one application is rejected, the other can still be accepted.

"We were very happy with the Commission's recommendation and decision to split-up the application," said Linda Weiss, co-spokesperson for residents who are committed to designate this area a landmark "The need for making this property a landmark is of importance not only for the architectural significance, but for the setting, history and the uniqueness of this site."

Many residents who live close to the area attended the hearing to voice their concerns.

"I really feel this area should be considered a landmark because it has been there for so many years," said Barbara Gottlieb, who lives adjacent to the property. "The land there is just so beautiful. I used to give the kids carrots to feed the horses. It is like being in a nature conservatory. The openness was the reason that I bought the house."

"I love to look outside my window and start and end my day by looking at the beautiful sight," said Caryn Gottlieb.

Weiss introduced many Community leaders to speak at the meeting on behalf of the motion to landmark this site.

"The East Norwich Civic Association unanimously supports the decision to make this area a landmark," said Matthew T. Mange, president of the East Norwich Civic Association. "We are a neighboring community which has lost a majority of historical building and we understand the significance of losing the past."

"I strongly recommend the board consider designation," said Edward Smitts, the Official Historian of Nassau County. "The complex does meet the criteria certainly as a local and national candidate for registration."

There was opposition to this application that was voiced at this hearing as well.

"We have had this property for a long time and our taxes are almost $64,000 a years and the rents do not come close to covering our taxes," said Samuel Underhill Mitchell, current owner of the property. "It sounds nice to make this an historical landmark, but who is going to pay for it?"

Mitchell grew up in the house, which has been in his family for many years. He is currently under contract with Forest Daily Developers and the plans call for the house to be preserved, but, under the current plans, the barn will not be saved.

"I thought I had done a good job when I got the house preserved [with the developer] because I did not want to see it destroyed," said Mitchell. "I was planning on having assisted living and residential areas there. The neighbors don't want this, but I feel like this would be best."

The property is currently zoned residential and in order to complete Mitchell's current plans, there would need to be a change of zoning. This is a separate issue entirely as it does not pertain to the Landmark Commission, but the issue might be raised at a future hearing.

"When my client met with Mr. Mitchell he made one thing clear," said Wayne Edwards, attorney representing Forest Daily City Contracting. "He wants to preserve the house."

Edwards explained that Forest Daily has planned 2.4 acres for assisted living and has also planned to preserve the house.

Edwards suggested to the Commission that the only reason the applicants included the house and barn in the plans, is they knew that the property could not be developed if landmark designation took place. He requested that this meeting be postponed, which was denied by the Commission.

"We are here to work with the Commission and we are not planning any bulldozing," said Edwards.

Many community members addressed their comments to Edwards, as they spoke in front of the Commission, and voiced concerns about his intentions.

"What we are not hearing is that the developer is going to save the house, but he wants to do this by moving it," said Lisa Lauricella, co-spokesperson for area residents along with Weiss. "We do not think this is wise because then it can not be designated a national registry."

The community is invited to attend the next hearing regarding this matter which will take place on March 8, at 7 p.m. at Oyster Bay Town Hall.