A Waterfront Mystery: Where Was Standard Oil?

The question of whether or not Standard Oil owned a parcel of land south of the port and operated a transfer facility there continues to be unresolved--or, to state it in another way, City officials have not yet acknowledged that such a facility existed on the 9.8 acres they want to acquire from Holcim. At the informal Common Council meeting on April 8, city attorney Cheryl Roberts reported that the title searcher hired by the City had not discovered Standard Oil ownership of any land south of the port. Timothy O'Connor, however, had in hand a copy of the deed that transferred ownership of the 2.4-acre parcel--"Parcel B"--to Standard Oil in 1888.

The idea that Standard Oil ownership had not been discovered in the title search raised questions in the minds of many, and on Tuesday, at the regular meeting of the Common Council, Roberts addressed the issue by saying that there was "a serious misunderstanding about what a title search is." She went on to explain that a title search did not trace the chain of title back to the beginning but only went back as far as a warranty deed. A title search, she explained, "insures title for a specific period of time."

Seeming not to know when Standard Oil is believed to have owned the land, Roberts went on to assert that before 1850, when the railroad was established, no one could have owned the land in question because it didn't exist. She maintained that the land owned by Standard Oil was north of the port, where the tank farm had been until the early 1990s. Roberts' placement of the Standard Oil property was confirmed by Alderman Cappy Pierro (Fifth Ward), who said that "oil barges pulled up where the Spirit of Hudson docks now." Roberts reiterated that Crawford & Associates would not be recommending a Phase II environmental study because the Phase I study was discovering no reason for doing a Phase II.

On the issue of use and possible contamination, Alderman David Marston (First Ward) made reference to a letter received from Riverkeeper, which urged the Council to determine with certainty if Standard Oil did or did not own part of the land that the City is seeking to acquire and to make public why a Phrase II environmental assessment was not required. Alderman John Friedman (Third Ward) then asked Roberts if it would be possible "to have the title company go back farther" in order to have complete transparency, since "citizens have questions about how this decision [to acquire the land] was made." Alderman Nick Haddad (First Ward) concurred that it was necessary to establish that past ownership "has no measurable impact."

When it was decided that an investigation to establish chain of title be done, Roberts told the Council that Rapport Meyer, the law firm where Roberts works, would "do it in house." Because of this additional research and because the Council would not meet again until May 21, it was decided that the deadline in the resolution rescinding the February 11 resolution would be changed from May 1 to May 15. 

Mayor William Hallenbeck, who had originally suggested the May 1 deadline, objected to the postponement and read a prepared statement that reinforced his position. In it, he declared that Holcim had until May 1 to sign the agreement to transfer the land, and on May 2, the City "must move forward to develop the waterfront no matter who owns the port and with or without the Department of State's blessing." He talked about ensuring that "private shipping can coexist with public uses" and said he supported efforts to acquire the land by eminent domain. He spoke of the North Bay project and complained that "too much time has been spent on South Bay." He mentioned as a goal "retail development on Water Street" and concluded by suggesting that the Department of State was "trying to infringe on the City's home rule authority by holding the City hostage by making this [the land transfer] a requirement for its approval of the LWRP."
COPYRIGHT 2013 CAROLE OSTERINK

The rendering of developed Water Street is from the 1996 Vision Plan.

About that Gable

Here's the word on the missing gable. It seems that the gable was never intended to be an integral part of the roof. The gable is being fabricated separately and will be mounted on the roof when it's completed.

With the eaves on the roof already in place, it's hard to imagine how a gable added as an ornament is going to achieve any semblance of authenticity.

Historic photograph courtesy Bruce Mitchinson

Remember Galvan Quarters?

In July 2012, the Board of Supervisors Human Services Committee passed a resolution authorizing Paul Mossman, commissioner of social services, to enter into a lease agreement with the Galvan Initiatives Foundation for a transitional housing facility to be called "Galvan Quarters." Only Hudson Third Ward supervisor Ellen Thurston voted against it. (The next month, the resolution was tabled by the Finance Committee, and that proved to be the end of it.)

Now, less than a year later, the news from the Human Services Committee is that there are only eight homeless people in Columbia County. Nathan Mayberg has the story in the Register-Star: "County homeless numbers nosedive."

What would we have done with thirty-seven units of transitional housing and only eight people to occupy them?

Rumors Confirmed

There have been rumors abroad that Holcim may be selling its property in Hudson and Greenport. These rumors seem to be confirmed in an email sent on January 30, 2013, by city attorney Cheryl Roberts to Holcim attorney Donald Stever. This email, which was part of the "stack of printouts of private email" that The Valley Alliance received in response to its FOIL request, is quoted in full on The Valley Alliance website. 

On the topic of the land transfer, Roberts writes: 

The City is prepared and will move forward with eminent domain proceedings at its February meeting unless your client is prepared to move forward with this transaction. The City may also be prepared to meet with the private entity to whom Holcim is selling the property and Holcim if such a meeting would be of assistance.

Is selling--that sounds pretty definite. Of course, so does will move forward, and we know that never happened. Still, shall we speculate about which private entity is buying the port and the quarry?

Symmetry Restored

For as long as most people in Hudson can remember, the knob at the top of the finial that surmounts the west parapet at 317 Allen Street has been missing. But it is missing no more. 

Yesterday the artisans who had fabricated the reproduction ornament were up on a scaffold securing it in place and restoring the perfect symmetry of the Jacobean and Dutch inspired mansion that is the Inn at Hudson.

City to Enter into MOU with Galvan for Senior Center

The Common Council passed a resolution last night that, in one fell swoop, abandoned the plan to construct a new building for the senior center next to the Youth Center on South Third Street and made a commitment to locate the City's senior program in the Armory, now being called the Galvan Community Learning Center.

The discussion of the resolution started with Alderman Wanda Pertilla (Second Ward), who chairs the Youth & Aging Committee, telling the Council that she had taken thirty seniors on a tour of the space last week and they had been "very impressed." "They saw the vision of the Galvan Foundation," said Pertilla. The floor plan for the space, distributed at the meeting by Daniel Kent, executive director for the Galvan Foundation, seemed, however, to show a vision for the space not shared by all of Hudson's seniors.

Although the fine print indicates that the larger room, identified as the "Meeting Room," will accommodate 10 people doing yoga or 21 people exercising, the floor plan shows four big round tables, seating 10 each, designated "Bingo/Lunch." The smaller room, identified as the "Classroom," has three tables, seating 6 each, for "Cards," and there are two tables for 4 in the southeast turret marked "Puzzle."

Several things about the MOU (memorandum of understanding) worried some of the aldermen. Alderman John Friedman (Third Ward) noted that it made no mention of parking. Alderman David Marston (First Ward) stated that the new MOU was "tremendously different" from the one presented just last week and included, in the item about Project Financing, the expressed expectation that the City would turn over the money intended for a new building that the City would own to this project: "City shall make a good faith effort to facilitate the transfer of project development financing previously allocated for the purpose of developing a Senior Center, including the $400,000 grant from New York State Office of Community Renewal (OCR) and the $100,000 grant from Hudson Community Development Planning Agency (HCDPA)." Alderman Nick Haddad said of the new MOU, "It sounds like we're losing control of every aspect of planning," and expressed the opinion that "for $500,000, we should have more than just a cursory say."

Encouraged to speak by Pertilla, Doris Moore, the City's commissioner of aging, dismissed concerns about parking, saying of the seniors, "Most of us park on all the side streets, and we walk," and expressed impatience with the length of time the senior center has been under consideration, "We're tired of it, and we want it." Alderman Robert "Doc" Donahue (Fifth Ward), in his fashion, adjured the aldermen concerned about the terms of the MOU to "stop stonewalling."

The vote was taken, and all but Friedman, Haddad, Marston, and Alderman Chris Wagoner (Third Ward) voted in support of the resolution. Haddad voted no; Friedman and Marston abstained, with Friedman commenting before he voted, "The MOU changed in the week between the informal and the formal meetings. This is not the way we should be doing business"; Wagoner was absent from the meeting.
COPYRIGHT 2013 CAROLE OSTERINK

Not to Be Missed

The Valley Alliance reveals an extraordinary statement made by city attorney Cheryl Roberts, discovered by Peter Jung in a mass of FOILed documents the organization is in the process of reviewing.

Where's the Peak?

Last summer, Gossips followed closely the evolution of the design for 67-71 North Fifth Street. Over several months, a spokesperson for Galvan Partners presented two designs for the building that bore no resemblance to the building as it was or ever had been. Members of the Historic Preservation Commission repeated asked for a design more in keeping with the house as we know it. Finally, in August 2012, a design was presented that was reasonably close to the design of the original, and the HPC was able to grant a certificate of appropriateness.

Some people wondered why the pitch of the front gable couldn't be the same as the original and why there couldn't be windows in the peak as there had been in the original, but there is no need to agonize over such details anymore. The roof is done, and there is no gable.

How, one asks, do things like this happen? How, one also asks, is the City of Hudson, whose laws have been flouted, going to respond?

COPYRIGHT 2013 CAROLE OSTERINK

Seen on the Street

White Whale has moved down the block to its new home at 410 Warren Street. Meanwhile, back at 434, these signs have appeared in the windows.

Gossips in the company of Beyoncé! Whodathunkit?

Many thanks to Aaron Enfield for providing these pictures.

After the Fire

Susan Lynn Troy, who was in second grade at St. Mary's when the old school burned, was inspired by this morning's post to share a memory. 

In June of that year, two months after the fire, each child got to pick a brick from a pile of bricks salvaged from the rubble. The children then painted the bricks--any color they wanted--and pasted--using that white library paste many of us remember--their school picture on it to make a Father's Day gift. 

If any reader has one of those bricks, Gossips would love to publish a picture of it. Click here to connect with Gossips.

The Anniversary of a Loss

Today marks the fortieth anniversary of the fire that destroyed St. Mary's Academy. The turn-of-the-century school building, which stood on the southwest corner of Third and Allen streets, was consumed in a spectacular conflagration on the evening of April 15, 1973.

Designed by Hudson architect Michael J. O'Connor, the building was completed in 1900. Originally all grades--kindergarten through 12th--were taught there. In 1956, when a new building--what is today known as St. Mary's Academy--was completed, high school students were moved to the new building, and this building continued to serve kindergarten through 8th grade. In 1971, when limited enrollment forced St. Mary's to stop serving high school students, kindergarten through 8th grades were moved across the street. In 1972, the 1900 building, abandoned, was boarded up.

On the evening of April 15, 1973, according to a report by Harvey McCagg which appeared the next day in the Register-Star, the fire was discovered at 8:26 p.m. by a police officer, Larry Walker, and Albert "Turk" Traver, who was then alderman for the First Ward and lived at 251 Allen Street, the house immediately adjacent to the school building. When the two men broke down a wooden door on the south side of the building, they "faced a wall a fire."

McCagg reported that "when the Hudson firemen arrived, the flames had spread through the south side of the building and to the second floor." A half hour after the fire was reported, the flames broke through the building's slate roof and "billowed 50 to 60 feet in the air." The flames were said to be visible from Catskill and Stottville. While firemen worked to contain the fire and prevent it from spreading to the Traver house (251 Allen Street), homeowners on Allen Street were on their roofs with garden hoses and brooms to extinguish embers that fell there.

There were problems with accessing hydrants and with water pressure. Firemen had to break the windows of a parked car to access a fire hydrant. The Greenport Fire Department was called in to use their four-inch feeder hoses to pump water from Union Street. The Stottville Fire Department pumped water from the Hudson River to douse the flames. 

The conflagration attracted hundreds of spectators, who had to be herded out of the way to clear a path for emergency vehicles and warned of the danger of falling overhead wires and collapsing walls. It was reported that "many spectators reminisced about their school days at St. Mary's and a number offered the opinion that the well-oiled hardwood floors were responsible for the speed with which the fire spread." Two of the spectators were arrested and charged with public drunkenness; the next day they were fined $15 each by the city judge.

The day-after report in the Register-Star gives no information about the cause of the fire. It simply says the fire was under investigation. Decades later, the usual explanation of its cause is similar to that given for the Candy Lane fire, which occurred six years later: kids had broken into the vacant building and were either smoking or playing with matches. Some popular accounts actually identify the culprits, but there is no way of proving their credibility.
COPYRIGHT 2013 CAROLE OSTERINK

The black-and-white photographs accompanying this post appeared in the Register-Star.

Many thanks to Paul Barrett, proprietor of the Country Squire Bed & Breakfast, at 251 Allen Street, for providing the photographs and the information for this post.

Gossips Shopping Guide

Looking for a refrigerator for your vintage kitchen? You may find just what you're looking for on South Second Street. The sign for A-1 Refrigeration & Restoration appeared at 6 South Second Street a few months ago, and in recent weeks, vintage refrigerators have been on display in the windows, including a 1930 Frigidaire that appears to be ready to go.

The full inventory of vintage refrigerators can be found on their website.

Observed on the Way to the Supermarket

A Gossips reader wanted to know why there was a row of NO PARKING signs staked out in front of the Police Commissioner's house today, and frankly, Gossips found it a little curious, too.

Not to Be Missed

On his blog, Sam Pratt turns a gimlet eye on the track record of the Columbia County Chamber of Commerce Crystal Apple awards: "Bruised Apples."

Historic Preservation: Elements Found and Lost

Eleven projects came before the Historic Preservation Commission on Friday morning seeking certificates of appropriateness. With Mayor William Hallenbeck and former mayor Rick Scalera, now special adviser to the Galvan Foundation, in the audience to monitor the proceedings, HPC chair Rick Rector galloped the commission through a review of the projects at a breakneck speed. Many of the certificates of appropriateness were for signs: The Barlow Hotel at 542 Warren Street; new shop called Finch at 613 Warren Street; Geoffrey Good at 238 Warren Street; a new business on the second floor at 444 Warren Street; and replacement signs for the St. Charles Hotel on Park Place and Columbia Street.

Walter Ritchie was there to present plans for the "other" Armory house, at 61-65 North Fifth Street, on behalf of the Galvan Initiatives Foundation. Things went much more smoothly for this house than they had for its neighbor at 67-71 North Fifth Street, primarily because the plan is to replicate what the house, which was built in 1865, looked like in 1910, after it had been remodeled. Ritchie reported that Art Cincotti, who is doing the wood work on the house, found the original porch posts for both this house and 67-71 in the basement of the Armory, and they will be re-installed on the houses. All the original window sash and the shutters on this house will be reproduced in wood. 

At 613 Warren Street, twenty-year-old replacement windows are being replaced with two over two windows with wood sash that replicate what was originally on the building. HPC architect member Jack Alvarez, a proponent of restoring original old-growth wood windows, wanted it to be noted for the record that the windows now being replaced, which probably replaced the building's original windows, very likely more than a hundred years old, were only twenty years old. He used the opportunity to make the point that replacement windows last, at best, for only twenty years, whereas original wood windows, which in most cases have already lasted for more than a hundred years, will last much longer if properly restored.

At 624 Warren Street, James Male wants to replace the door on the east side of the building, at 9 North Seventh Street, with a six-panel oak door with a transom, which replicates the door to 9 North Seventh Street that appears in this historic photograph of the building. HPC member David Voorhees pointed out that the door that Male now wants to reproduce was there until only two years ago, when the previous owner of the building replaced it, allegedly in the dead of night, with a new metal door. It's too bad the previous owner didn't stash the then unwanted historic door in the cellar of the building.

The first Galvan project--61-65 North Fifth Street--sailed through its review, but the second--113 Union Street--did not.

104 Union Street

The first thing the HPC reacted to was the portico with its cast iron railing, which bears an amazing resemblance to the cast iron (perhaps cast aluminum) railings installed at 102 and 104 Union Street, the new Galvan buildings constructed in 2011. Voorhees was the first to object to what he called "New Orleans style" iron work, asking Ward Hamilton, who was presenting the project for Galvan, about the "historic basis" for the choice. Rector observed that they appeared to be the same railings used on 102 and 104 Union Street, without HPC approval. HPC member Phil Forman seemed to be about to argue that the presence of similar railings on the same block could justify their use on this building when he began, "The case is that people do build stuff over time." Forman was interrupted by HPC member Scott Baldinger, who said simply, "The railings are incongruous to the house."

HPC counsel Cheryl Roberts then weighed in, dispassionately clarifying that if the railings on the other two houses had been installed without approval from the HPC, their presence in the neighborhood could not be used to argue for the compatibility of similar railings. The detail below from the rendering shows what the HPC approved for 102 and 104 Union Street; the photograph shows what we got.

Alvarez raised an objection about the windows proposed for 113 Union, observing that the windows "appear to be of a division and design not compatible with the period." The windows proposed are four over four; what would be typical for the period are two over two. Alvarez went on to say, "I've never seen four over four except in the South, and when they simply couldn't get the glass." Alvarez was probably referring to the period after the Civil War.

The biggest problem for 113 Union Street, however, was the size of the proposed portico. Code enforcement officer Peter Wurster pointed out that code requires that there be a minimum of 60 inches from the outer edge of a porch to the edge of the curb. The new portico proposed for 113 Union Street projects 5 feet and 9 inches from the house, farther than the steps that are being replaced, and Wurster offered his opinion that it was "probably in violation of the code." The distance from the portico to the edge of the curb had not been provided in the application, and therefore the application was deemed incomplete.

Architect Michael Davis also appeared before the HPC on Friday, presenting plans for the restoration of the ground floor facade at 443 Warren Street. The application for a certificate of appropriateness included a 1905 photograph of the building, which is being used as the guide for the restoration. The photograph was probably this one--or one very similar--which Gossips discovered in the 1905 Hudson city directory. The first floor of the building will be restored to have two storefronts, just as it does in the picture. 

The final project to come before the HPC was 410 Warren Street. In January, the new owners of the building, formerly part of Phil Gellert's Northern Empire, stripped away the plywood meant to "modernize" the facade to reveal the details of the original facade.

Now the owners intend to install a new display window in the east wall of the building that will replicate the design of the windows on the front of the building. 

Of Interest

Apropos the local conversation about PINS, there is an article in the New York Times this morning about public schools in Houston: "With Police in Schools, More Children in Court." 

Word Gets Around

Today, two days after it was reported by The Gossips of Rivertown, the Register-Star has the news that there will be no Filli's Fresh Market at 449 Warren Street: "Filli's out of Hudson Arcade Project plan." 

The Register-Star article, written by Joe Gentile, has quotes from Daniel Kent, executive director of the Galvan Initiatives Foundation, and Rick Scalera, special adviser to Galvan. Gentile attributes to Kent the statement that "the Galvan Foundation is not interested in operating a grocery store" and intends to lease the space. Scalera, after reportedly saying, "We're keenly interested to open up a market at that location," opines that the building's front patio would make a "picturesque cafe." Inspired by Scalera's "vision," Kent is reported to have added, "Diners . . . could attract passersby, and transform Hudson's 'food desert' into a 'food destination,'" betraying that he doesn't know the definition of "food desert" and is unaware that Hudson is already a "food destination."

The article also reports Scalera's claim that "the foundation received the support of the city's Historical Preservation Commission. . . ." The Historic Preservation Commission did approve the design for the building but it was a grueling process, which included the HPC's very first workshop and subjected the HPC to bullying from Scalera, belligerence from Galvan attorney Mark Greenberg, and criticism from members of the public who thought a much needed grocery store on Warren Street shouldn't have to be subjected to the "nonsense" of a review by the HPC. Thank goodness the members of the HPC stood their ground. If they hadn't, Hudson would have ended up with no grocery store and an inappropriate building in a prominent location on our main street.

Parking, Parking, Parking

Whenever there is discussion about the adaptive reuse of the Armory--for the library, for a senior center, and possibly also for a primary or urgent care facility--someone invariably asks about parking. This seeming obsession with parking brings to mind how the previous owners of the Armory, we were told, wanted the fire department to burn down (for training purposes) the two houses just across the alley (they owned them, too, of course) because they wanted the land for a parking lot but didn't want to pay to have the houses demolished.

Even someone who mourns all the buildings in Hudson that have been sacrificed for parking lots (or as a former mayor would say "parkin' lots"), and even someone who would like to think that Hudson is a walkable city (given the state of our sidewalks off Warren Street, we're not there yet) has to admit that the blasé attitude shown by decision makers about parking at the Armory is a bit bizarre. Lack of parking always seemed to be a huge issue when the library was located at 400 State Street, but the current library board, euphoric about the move to the Armory, seems not to be the least bit worried about parking at their new location.

On Wednesday night, Michael Sullivan of Crawford & Associates made an initial presentation to the Planning Commission in the site plan review for relocating the Hudson Area Library to the Armory. Parking is one of the things that the Planning Commission concerns itself with, and Sullivan affirmed that there were 20 on-street parking spaces along the perimeter of the building: 4 or 5 on North Fifth Street, 10 or 11 on State Street, and 5 on Short Street. The curb cuts on Short Street, Sullivan said, were to be restored as curbs, thus allowing parking. When Don Tillson, chair of the Planning Commission, mentioned other things that might be going into the Armory, Sullivan said that the application being submitted was only for the library.

So what happens when (and if) the senior center and whatever use is proposed for the new addition to the building on Short Street come before the Planning Commission? Do they get to claim the same 20 on-street parking spaces, too?

Get Back to What Once Was

It appears that the project to install a new slate mansard roof, reproduce the missing chimneys, and restore the upper story windows at 501 Union Street is now complete. What will the next step be in bringing the building back to what it once was?

Before

After

When the Building  Was New

Getting Along at the Armory

A couple of years ago, when Galvan Partners/Galvan Foundation first bought the Armory, Scott Baldinger, on his blog Word on the Street, shared his hope that the chain link fence on the south side of the building, complete with barbed wire, would be removed: "Barbed Remarks." His words went unheeded. The fence hasn't come down, and it's not likely it will be removed anytime soon. Yesterday at the Hudson Area Library board meeting, David Murphy, co-chair of the board's capital campaign committee, announced that a sign would soon be installed on the fence, presumably identifying the site as the future home of the Hudson Area Library and encouraging support.

Since the proposal was made to put the senior center in the Officers' Hall at the Armory, some have wondered what the library board thought of sharing the building with the City's nascent senior program. Apparently, Common Council president Don Moore made an effort to find out. HAL board president Mark Orton reported yesterday that he had met with Moore and had told him that he thought the senior center was a "good match programmatically and congenial." He went on to say, at yesterday's board meeting, that he thought the library might "participate with the senior center in developing programs" but commented that the library could not take over the responsibility of running the senior center. 

The discussion of the senior center at last night's library board meeting was prompted by Carole Clark, who had come to the meeting to ask if the library board members knew "what senior activities are like and what the space needs are." Clark specifically wanted to talk about the aerobics program which, she said, "needs a very large space and, when it's happening, is very loud." Clark, who participates in the aerobics program for seniors now offered at the Youth Center, said that more than twenty people--men and women--regularly take part in the aerobics class which is now held in the gymnasium upstairs at the Youth Center.

HAL board treasurer Marie Rasner, intimating that these concerns were being shared with the wrong body, told Clark, "We won't be asked if there is enough room."

Never Mind

The Register-Star reports today that the Iron Horse is open again: "Iron Horse Bar reopens." Nathan Mayberg reports that the New York State Workers' Compensation Board was allegedly acting on an anonymous tip which turned out to be false.

And Then There Were None

A year ago, we were eagerly anticipating two grocery stores in Hudson: Acres Co-op Market and Filli's Fresh Market. By the end of June, our hopes for a co-op market were dashed. Now it seems that there will be no urban version of the Claverack Market either, even though work continues at the "Hudson Arcade" site, which was to house the market.

It's not clear exactly what happened to put the kibosh on the plans for the grocery store. There are hints that the Filli's people may have been hoping for more financial support from Galvan than, in the end, Galvan was willing to provide, but, whatever the reason, Hudson is without the promise of a grocery store, and the building, if it ever is completed, will be available to some other commercial enterprise—maybe a grocery store, maybe not.

The fact that there will be a different tenant in the building raises a question. When the Planning Commission was doing its site plan review, people living on Union Street, whose backyards were across Cherry Alley from the proposed grocery store, came out to express their concern about large trucks—semis—using the alley when making deliveries to the store in the early hours of the morning. The Filli's people assured them that any trucks making deliveries before 7 a.m. would access the store from Warren Street. The only vehicle using the alley for deliveries during business hours would be a small van bearing goods and supplies from the Claverack Market. 

Would the assurances made by the Filli's people be binding on some other tenant? Gossips went to the Planning Commission meeting tonight to find out and was told that the constraints on the use of the alley had been written into the site plan approval and would apply to any enterprise that occupied the building.