Gossips didn't observe all the work, but based on what was witnessed, it is believed that the second story windows in this picture are the new windows. On the first floor (obviously) only the one at the far left is new.
Also today, work on 366 Warren Street began, but what was presented to the Historic Preservation Commission as a "facade revision" looks more like a facade demolition.
When the proposal for 366 Warren Street came before the HPC in February, it was explained that the building is constructed of concrete blocks with an applied texture to make it appear to be brick--a practice that was common in the 1920s. Obviously, this building is less historic than the 1805 building next to it, which lost its gable when it was repaired after a fire in 1919 and was, according to city attorney Carl Whitbeck,"completely rebuilt" in 1980.
Still, the 1920s is almost a hundred years ago. Surely, 366 Warren Street deserves more respect than it is getting. One wonders if the HPC understood that the facade as it exists was to be completely demolished in the process of the "facade revision."
The end result is this commercial space, which is to be the new location of Hudson Home.
wheres the park ?
ReplyDeletethis is all just so wrong in too many ways for the center of a historic district that doesn't even require such extreme nonsense
but thats the town that scalera and his boys are building
thank you eric t galloway
for a lot of nothing
It seems what existed @ 366 Warren was banal at best. No great loss. This building is not historical judging from the structural steel and flat steel roof. Why jump to judgment about something that does not exist yet?
ReplyDeleteA lot of carping about EG project on the south corner of Warren & Fifth and its looking pretty good at the moment in spite of all the concern of it not being a bearing wall brick structured building.
Same goes for his efforts on the Fifth Street neighborhood. As a designer I just don't get all this EG criticism. What am I missing?
you're missing the glass house and the pile of stones
Deletedon't understand the application of this analogy ... "you're missing the glass house and the pile of stones" ... to the discussion of said structure @ 366
Deletebanal replacing banal. didnt you see the proposed drawing at the top of this thread ???
ReplyDelete