Preserving the "Accidental Beauty" of Hudson

The alleys of Hudson--Partition Street included among them--are beloved by many Hudsonians for their unique character and the unconventional, "accidental beauty" of the buildings that line these backstreets. 

Ten years ago, almost to the day, an exhibition opened at the Hudson Opera House (now Hudson Hall) that celebrated the unique character of Hudson's backstreets. Called No Parking: The Alleys and Garages of Hudson, the exhibition featured the photographs of Lisa Durfee, Peter Spear, and the late William Hellermann. The exhibition was one of Hudson's many memorable events. 

Photo: William Hellermann

It has been a goal of the Historic Preservation Commission to preserve the character of Hudson's uniquely charming backstreets, but it has not been an easy task, as more and more proposals come before them to return sagging and crumbling outbuildings to useful purposes, to convert what had been carriage houses and garages into habitable dwellings, and to introduce new structures into the context of historic accessory buildings. At the HPC meeting last Friday, yet another proposal was presented to replace a historic garage with a new structure. The garage in question is on South First Street, behind 30 Union Street.

This is not the first time the demolition of this garage has been proposed. In 2017, the HPC reviewed a similar proposal: to demolish the existing building and replace it with a new structure, build on the same footprint. In the 2017 proposal, the new building was to be a residence, and the design for the new building was meant to replicate the design of the historic building. In 2017, the building to be demolished was in much better shape than it is today. (Apologies for the poor quality of the image showing the elevation drawings for what was proposed in 2017.)

Gossips can find no documentation of what became of the 2017 proposal, but whatever the outcome in terms of getting a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC (and it is possible one was granted), the project proposed in 2017 was never pursued. According to the assessment rolls, the property has changed hands a couple of times since 2017, and now the current owner is again looking to demolish the century-old accessory building. 

Reviewing the proposal last Friday, the HPC expressed concern about the increased height of the new building, which at the apex of the roof exceeds 5 feet. They were also concerns about the design of the proposed building. John Schobel observed that what was proposed is "something that is so different in character from what is there" and opined, "It looks a little too modern." Hugh Biber and Miranda Barry noted that the doors are what are distinctive about the original building and suggested that element might be somehow replicated so that the new building might harken back to what was there. (It should be noted that the design proposed in 2017 did have features that were reminiscent of the doors on the existing building.)

It was decided that the applicant would consider the concerns of the HPC and come back with revisions.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK