Sunday, November 10, 2019

News from Friday's HPC Meeting

I will begin by confessing that I was not present at Friday's Historic Preservation Commission meeting owing to a nasty cold, but, thanks to reliable sources who were present, I am able to report the highlights of what transpired.

On September 27, after a public hearing, the HPC denied a certificate of appropriateness to the design for the new building proposed for 211 Warren Street, where the original building, believed to predate the Proprietors and the founding of Hudson, had to be demolished last year.

One of the issues was the ersatz oriel, which according to the applicants was inspired by the oriel next door at 209 Warren Street. During the public hearing, the oriel was criticized for not having windows on all sides to create "an interface of public and private space," and the applicants were urged to create an oriel that was "more delicate, more charming, and more transparent." At that time, the applicants maintained that, because this was to be a passive house and the walls were eighteen inches thick, it was "logistically impossible" to have windows on the side of the bay. 

What was logistically impossible seems to have become possible because on Friday a revised design was presented to the HPC with a window on the side of the oriel and four windows instead of three across the front.

On September 27, with only four members of the HPC present, granting the certificate of appropriateness was blocked by only one member--Paul Barrett. On Friday, with six members present, four (Phil Forman, Hugh Biber, Phillip Schwartz, and Miranda Barry) voted in favor of granting the certificate of appropriateness, and two (Barrett and John Schobel) were opposed. 

Those who favored granting a certificate of appropriateness seem to be of a mind that Hudson should not be held captive by its architectural heritage and should welcome examples of 21st-century design. One of those opposed called the proposed design "post-modern suburban architecture" that has no place on Warren Street.

Another application of interest that came before the HPC on Friday pertained to 226 Union Street. Proposals to replace the two windows at the front of the building's oriel with a single window, to remove the chimneys, and to make modifications in the detailing on the facade were rejected. 



The proposal to transform the two-car garage at the back of the property, on Cherry Alley, into a two-story structure will be the subject of a public hearing to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Friday, November 22, at City Hall.


COPYRIGHT 2019 CAROLE OSTERINK

8 comments:

  1. The side wall of the proposed new structure at #211 Warren looks like a design for the Bulgarian State Police headquarters, circa 1963.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That building has no place on Warren Street. We are continuing to erode the architectural history of this town building by building, house by house, and paint job by paint job. We had massive destruction during urban renewal, and now we are continuing that destruction piecemeal, until there will be little left and then everyone will wonder what happened. Even our Historic Commission has only a few faces of reason. They should NEVER have accepted that design. And our planning board is every bit as bad. No one knows what they are doing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, we know, you are the only one who knows, and everything should be done your way. You have said it many, many times.

      Delete
  3. The Historic Preservation Commission has no teeth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. THE HPC ISN'T ... most sitting on that committee are unqualified to pass judgment on design. May I never hear another criticism of Galvin on Gossips after this tainted design gets approved.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Very easy to make a comment from the sideline. HPC dose the best job , given its parameters. If you want a change then put your name in the hat and when called, show up every 2nd fri and be prepared to do your due diligence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you had a name I'd reply ... you hide behind some stupid name and then want to be taken serious... I think not.

      Delete