Three Projects of Interest Before the HPC

The architects designing the replacement for this accessory building behind 30 Union Street were back before the Historic Preservation Commission on Friday, February 13.

At its January 9 meeting, the HPC expressed concern about the increased height of the new building and also about its design, which was very different in character from the existing building. It was noted that the doors are a distinctive element of the original building, and it was suggested that the design of the new building should somehow harken back to what was there. It was agreed the applicant would consider the concerns of the HPC and come back with revisions. 

The revisions presented at the February 13 HPC meeting, however, consisted only of altering the pitch of the roof to lower its apex. The result is a building that looks even more like a modern generic garage than the design with the more steeply pitched roof that was originally proposed. 

New building as originally proposed on January 9

Revised design presented on February 13

Asked about revisions in the design to make it reminiscent of the historic building and more compatible with its surroundings, the architects they had created such a design, but it had been rejected by their client, the owner of the property. They did, however, show the revised design to the HPC.

The HPC declared the application complete and voted on what had been proposed. It was unanimously rejected by the members of the commission. Phil Forman, HPC chair, requested that the next time the proposal came before the HPC, the owner of the property be present at the meeting, either in person or virtually.

A second proposal of interest involves 26 Warren Street, a true Federal house constructed in 1810, which is now being operated as a hotel called the Hudson Mariner.  

The proposal, which was presented by architect Walter Chatham, is to increase the occupiable space by introducing dormers at the front and building out an addition at the back.

Cara Cragan, the architect member of the HPC, noted the roofline of the house is in actuality much lower pitched than it appears in the drawings. Of the proposal, she opined, "This is a reasonable solution for a business problem, but there is thought that the building should not be touched at all." 

It was determined that Chatham would return with the necessary adjustments to the drawings, and that there would be a public hearing on the project to take place at the next HPC meeting on February 27.

Demolish and demolition are two words you don't like to hear at an HPC meeting, but they are central to the proposal for 309-311 Union Street. The owners wish to demolish everything on the lot--the two-family house and the two accessory buildings--and construct new buildings in their place. 

The owners reported that an engineer's study, recommended by former code enforcement officer Craig Haigh, "advised against even attempting to salvage the house." The renderings below show what they are proposing to build in its place. The first two show the house, which would face Union Street; the second two show the "carriage house" (a garage with an apartment above), which would be behind it on Partition Street.

Cragan acknowledged that the proposed new structure was "in keeping with the building that exists." HPC chair Phil Forman described the proposal as a "loss of history issue not a compatibility issue." Cragan then suggested that the house might be replaced with something contemporary, "to create something that the future wants to preserve as well." Commenting later in the meeting, Ron Kopnicki questioned the principle of contrast, saying that what good contemporary design is has not been determined. He urged that the HPC "have respect for the past and respect for context." 

HPC member Paul Barrett spoke of 34 South Front Street, saying, "It should have fallen down by itself, but it didn't. It was salvaged." (According to Apartments.com, one of the apartments in the building is now renting for $2,800 a month.) Barrett suggested that the owners of 309-311 Union Street speak with the man who salvaged 34 South Front Street about his experience.

34 South Front Street before renovation

34 South Front Street today

Kopnicki noted that the house at 309-311 Union had not been condemned, and, up until the house was sold at the end of 2024, there were people living in it. (According to the assessment rolls, the property is currently owned by Dinally Home Restoration of Hudson LLC, with an address in Bloomfield, NY.) Matt McGhee urged the HPC to request photographic evidence of "the crumbling walls and other things claimed," commenting, "People who don't understand old buildings may not understand that was the way they were meant to be."

For this proposal too, the HPC will hold a public hearing at its next meeting on February 27.

COPYRIGHT 2026 CAROLE OSTERINK