More About 134-136 Warren Street

A number of people showed up on Friday morning for the Historic Preservation Commission meeting, among them Ferol Barton Blake, who designed the storefront proposed for 134 Warren Street; Tim Slowinski, who owns Limner Gallery at 123 Warren Street; Pam Kungle, who owns and resides at 124 Warren Street; Joe Gentile, from the Register-Star; John Isaacs, of imby.com; and Myron Polenberg, husband of HPC member Peggy Polenberg. It seemed most were there expecting an opportunity to protest or defend the HPC's decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness to the facade changes proposed for 134 Warren Street, but no such opportunity was forthcoming.

HPC chair Rick Rector stated at the outset that it was not a public hearing and they would not be entertaining comments from the public. The purpose of the meeting he explained was "only to do the HPC's business."

The HPC first attended to two applications that had, at the last meeting, been deemed incomplete: replacement windows for 556 State Street and a revision of the front porch at 434 East Allen Street. In each case, the information needed to make the application complete was provided, and the members of the HPC voted unanimously to grant a certificate of appropriateness.

Next came the formal vote on 134-136 Warren Street. Rector read aloud the statement, prepared by HPC counsel Carl Whitbeck, denying a certificate of appropriateness and then called for a vote. Of the five HPC members present (Tony Thompson has absent), four voted in support of the denial (Rector, David Voorhees, Miranda Barry, and Peggy Polenberg), and only one--Phil Forman--voted against it. It is interesting to note that on August 8 Polenberg voted to grant a certificate of appropriateness, and two weeks later, she voted in support of denying a certificate of appropriateness.

The HPC then took its formal vote on the language of the certificates of appropriateness for three other projects: handrails for the stoop at 32 Warren Street; a sign at 431 Warren Street; facade renovation at 243 Warren Street.  (Two of these properties are owned by HPC members, and each member appropriately recused himself when the vote was taken on his project.)

The business of the HPC being completed, the meeting was adjourned twenty minutes after it began.  Myron Polenberg, however, objected that the people who had come to the meeting had not been heard. Rector pointed out that the meeting was adjourned. Whitbeck assured Rector, "It's up to you whether you accept public comment or not."
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Not to Be Missed

Mark Orton, on his blog Current Matters, comments on Mayor Hallenbeck's explanation of why two years have passed and there is still "no sign or stone for Staley B. Keith": "Our Stranger and Stranger Mayor."

Curiouser and Curiouser

A year ago, Per Blomquist presented to the Planning Commission his plan to demolish the houses at 248 and 250 Columbia Street and construct in their place a new building with five apartments.

At that meeting, then city attorney Cheryl Roberts, in her capacity as counsel to the Planning Commission, misinterpreted the Schedule of Bulk and Area Regulations and set in motion nine months of unnecessary turmoil over the alleged 1,500 square foot minimum requirement for apartments in the R-4 zone. The first casualty of that snafu was Blomquist's plan for 248 and 250 Columbia Street. The Zoning Board of Appeals denied him an area variance in November 2013.

In May, when clearer heads prevailed and it was finally acknowledged that 1,500 square feet pertained to lot size not apartment size, it was thought that Blomquist might resurrect his plan, but he didn't. 

Last week, Gossips noticed someone on the roof of one of the buildings, apparently making repairs. Could it be that Blomquist had a change of heart and was thinking of rehabbing the houses instead of demolishing them? Then today Gossips noticed this.

The houses, now almost completely boarded up, have been spray painted gold.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

More Images from the Mystery Album

Since Sunday, Gossips has been publishing pictures from a family photo album that started out in Hudson and ended up in Mary Heinrich Aloi's antique shop in South Burlington, Vermont. The pictures in the album are believed to date from around 1911 to 1919, and the people who now have custody of the album are hoping to identify the family in the pictures and return the album to their descendants.

More pictures from the album were posted on Flickr today, but, although immensely interesting to students of Hudson history, they offer little help in identifying the people whose album it is, unless, of course, someone reading Gossips recognizes a grandmother or grandfather (or a great grandmother or great grandfather) in one of the pictures. In these pictures, members of the family, or perhaps family members and friends, appear posing at the back of St. Winifred on Promenade Hill, swimming (could it be at Sandy Beach?), sitting at the edge of the river, and with a horse at what appears to be a brickyard.

Photos courtesy Mary Heinrich Aoli, Vintage Inspired Lifestyle Marketplace, and John and Susan Roberts

Struggle Over Second and Warren

At its meeting on Tuesday, the Common Council received as a communication a letter from Bruce H. Steinberg of Danian Realty in Chappaqua, NY, the current owner of 134-136 Warren Street, stating the intention to appeal the Historic Preservation Commission's decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness to the storefront proposed for 134 Warren Street.

After introducing the appeal, Council president Don Moore said, "The HPC is still considering the proposal," and commented that he was "not aware that we have entertained an appeal in the past." Two statements that are not quite right. 

At their meeting on August 8, the HPC, after hearing public comment on the proposal, voted on whether or not to grant a certificate of appropriateness to the project. Two members of the commission voted aye; four members voted nay. Hence a certificate of appropriateness was denied. All that is left to do is vote formally on the language, composed by counsel, stating why the certificate of appropriateness was denied. 

Relevant to the statement about the Council never having entertained an appeal before, in 2012, Galvan Partners initiated an appeal to the Common Council after being denied a certificate of appropriateness for their plan to move the Robert Taylor House from the head of Tanners Lane to 23 Union Street. Moore was correct in that the process of an appeal has never been established or tried, because a few months after Galvan Partners initiated the appeal, they apparently abandoned the notion of moving the house. 

Today an email written by Tim Slowinski, owner of the Limner Gallery, at 123 Warren Street, and sent to members of BeLo3rd found its way to Gossips' desk. The email urges people to attend the Common Council Economic Development Committee meeting tonight at 6 p.m. and the Historic Preservation Commission meeting at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning "to protest this decision"--"this decision" being the denial of a certificate of appropriateness to the proposed storefront at 134 Warren Street. 

In his email, Slowinski makes a couple of statements that are unfair to the HPC and actually not true. He contends that the application was denied "because the commission said they wanted to restrict business in the neighborhood and keep it more residential." HPC decisions have nothing to do with use. As HPC member Miranda Barry rightly stated at the meeting on August 8, "It is not our place to decide if this block should become all commercial or all residential." The HPC is charged with protecting the historic architecture of Hudson, which means that if a building has survived for 150 years as a residential building with its facade unchanged, that facade should not be altered no matter what permitted use the building is put to. 

HPC chair Rick Rector made the point at the meeting that the ground floor of 134 Warren Street has had a commercial tenant for the past ten years. Also there are at least four businesses being operated in what are historically residential buildings in the 100 block of Warren without requiring changes to the facades of the buildings: BCB Art, at 116 Warren Street; Davis Orton Gallery, at 114 Warren Street; Jeff Bailey Gallery, at 127 Warren Street; and Dish, at 103 Warren Street. The uses of these buildings have changed, but the architectural integrity of their facades has not. 

Slowinski's email concludes: "It is good and essential for the historic architecture of our community to be preserved, but it is not the place of the commission to restrict and/or engineer economic growth in our neighborhood." In making the decision it did, the Historic Preservation Commission was doing exactly what Slowinski calls "good and essential." They were preserving the architectural integrity of 134 Warren Street. 

After the public hearing on August 8, HPC member Tony Thompson noted that all the comments in support of the project had to do with economics, and he reminded his colleagues that "historic preservation itself has an economic value"--a principle that everyone in Hudson should acknowledge and embrace. Thompson also admonished his colleagues, "Individual ideas of economic viability should not be part of the picture," and in the decision that the HPC made, they were not.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Not to Be Missed

Scott Baldinger on his blog, Word on the Street, critiques the plans now being discussed for Seventh Street Park and those now being implemented for the "linear park" in the 300 block from Warren to State streets: "Stairway to Purgatory." Baldinger's comments begin with this question: "What is it about Hudson that inspires so many would-be urban planners; worst of all, would-be urban planners who want to make an "original statement"?

More Images from the Mystery Album

This morning, two more pictures from the mystery album, created by a family in Hudson and recently discovered in an antique shop in South Burlington, Vermont, were posted on Flickr. The location of one of them is readily identified. 

The shingle on the house behind the young man in the picture reads "Dr. A. N. Tracy." According to the 1912 Hudson city directory, Dr. Tracy was a "homeopathic physician" who lived and practiced at 410 Union Street. What would have been just to the left in this picture, but out of the frame, is the Hudson Post Office, newly constructed in 1909. The picture below, from Historic Hudson's Rowles Studio Collection, taken in November 1923, shows the fate, a decade or so later, of 410 Union Street and several of its neighbors.

Identifying 410 Union Street in this picture from the album doesn't help much in locating the house and the block where it is believed the family lived. The second picture that was posted on Flickr today shows that block again.

This picture was taken from more or less the same vantage point as the picture of the parade or procession that was posted yesterday, but at a later date. The four-bay house that was under construction in the picture of the procession is finished in the picture of the motorcycle.

One thing that is clear is that the mystery street is not Union Street. The picture below, taken of a parade in 1917 to encourage people to buy Liberty Bonds to support the Great War, shows Union Street just east of 410 Union. The street is much wider, and the houses on the south side of the street bear no resemblance to the buildings on the opposite side of the mystery block.

So the questions remain: Where was this house, and who lived in it from around 1911 to 1919?
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Waiting for Action on the Weighted Vote

Gossips has often kvetched about the inequity of the weighted vote in Hudson--the scheme that is supposed to achieve the democratic goal of "one person, one vote" but in fact gives the representatives of the Fifth Ward a disproportionate amount of power on the Common Council. The weighted vote was taken up by Victor Mendolia in his Hudson Government 101 presentation at the Hudson FORWARD meeting on Monday night. The visuals for Mendolia's representation included a pie chart and a bar graph that show quite dramatically the inequity of the representation of the five wards on the Council.

This past spring, Hudson city government was the subject of a semester long seminar for a group of Hofstra Law students. The weighted vote was one of the topics studied. Brendan Friedman and Peter Barbieri, the two students who investigated the issue, reported that Hudson is the only city in the State of New York--probably in the entire United States--that uses the weighted vote to achieve "one person, one vote" and offered the opinion that Hudson's weighted vote, particularly because of the way it is calculated, raises constitutional questions.

People at the meeting on Monday night, very few of whom live in the Fifth Ward, wanted to know if anything was being done to correct the inequity of the weighted vote. The question was directed to Common Council president Don Moore, who was present at the meeting. (Aldermen from the Second, Third, and Fourth Wards--John Friedman, Tiffany Garriga, and Alexis Keith respectively--were also in attendance.) Moore replied that "the legal basis needs to be shown" that Hudson's weighted vote is unconstitutional and explained they were waiting for the full report from the Hofstra Law students. (What has been presented thus far is just the Executive Summary.) It was expected that the City would have the full report by now, since the study was completed at the end of the academic year, but it has not been received yet.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Turn Your Radios On

Today, on WGXC's @Issue, Debora Gilbert interviews congressional candidate Sean Eldridge. The prerecorded interview will be aired during the second half of the show at 10:30 a.m. WGXC can be heard at 90.7 FM or online at wgxc.org.

Homage to Hudson Avenue

On Sunday, I made the mistake of referring to the location of the Gifford-Wood Company in the 1910s as Hudson Street not Hudson Avenue. When the error was pointed out in a comment, I readily acknowledged it but lightheartedly (I thought) tried to excuse my shortcoming by pointing out that it was hard to think of this road, whose original raison d'etre was to access the new Gifford-Wood Company building that was constructed in 1910-1911, as something so grand as an avenue. For this I was castigated by another reader, who accused me, with much apparent indignation, of taking it upon myself to "rename one of Hudson's Streets, in this case an Avenue." So it is in penance for this transgression that I share this little bit of Hudson Avenue history, found in the Hudson Evening Register for February 5, 1913. (Note that Hudson Avenue doesn't even get a label on the Bing map reproduced below.)

OBJECT TO MATERIAL PUT ON HUDSON AVENUE

Gifford-Wood Co. Requests the Commission of Public Works to Remove It.

At the meeting of the Commission of Public works, which was held late yesterday afternoon, the following communication was received:

Gentlemen: Will you kindly cause to be removed from Hudson avenue the clay soil which you put there a couple of months ago. We believe there were 150 loads, more or less. At any rate all of it is most unsuitable for the purpose for which it was used, and it is a very great obstacle to us in the operation of our business. Would state [sic] that it can be readily removed on most any warm day, such as we have had for the past week or so, and we trust that you will grant this request at your earliest possible convenience and thus greatly oblige yours truly.                                                  GIFFORD-WOOD CO.

Superintendent O'Hara was asked about the material used on Hudson avenue, and he said that gravel, but not of the best quality, had been put on. He considered that the elements had much to do with making the road way much worse that it would be at other seasons.

COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Share Your Thoughts About Seventh Street Park

Last night, at the Hudson FORWARD meeting, Sheena Salvino and Branda Maholtz handed out a few paper copies of the survey seeking the community's thoughts about Seventh Street Park. Today the survey can be completed online. Just click here.

If you were one of the few who got a paper copy of the survey last night, you are asked to fill it out again online. One of the items on the survey proved a little confusing--making people uncertain about how to respond in order to have their opinion accurately noted--so that item has been changed to make it more straightforward.

If you're reading Gossips, you have access to the Internet and can do the survey online, but for those who don't, paper copies of the survey will be available at businesses around the park and at City Hall. The deadline for submitting surveys is October 1.

More Images from the Mystery Album

On Sunday, Gossips published some photographs from an album that found its way to an antique shop in South Burlington, Vermont. There is an effort afoot to identify the family in the pictures and to return the album to their descendants. Today, two new pictures from the album were posted on Flickr. 

The first shows a young woman standing by the stoop of the house where it is believed the family lived and includes the facades of the houses beyond. The slope of the street suggests that, although the only number that can be discerned on the house is 3, that could not have been the house's only number or its final number, because this house appears to have been on the north side--the even side--of a street that runs from east to west.

Then there's this picture, which is thought to have been taken from the stoop of the mystery house.

The picture inspires questions about the nature of the procession, which seems to be made up of six men in quite elaborate uniforms followed by a group of men with their hats doffed. Of interest, too, are the buildings across the street from the mystery house. Except for the one that appears to be under construction, most of them seem not to be houses, although the opposite side of the street seems to be nothing but houses.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Above the Fold in 1910

This article appeared on the front page of the Hudson Register on August 26, 1910. When did newspapers stop making reference to classical myth in their headlines? (Note that the police chief gets on a streetcar to go to the scene of the "crime.")

HE WAS SIMPLY A VICTIM OF MORPHEUS

Some People on Academy Hill Thought Man Lying Alongside Road Was Dead.

Excitement prevailed around the police headquarters shortly after 10 o'clock this morning when Chief Lane received a telephone [call] from Columbia street, informing him that a young man had been found lying dead along the roadside at the terminus of the street railway, opposite the cemetery. Before calling the coroner the Chief decided to investigate, so he sprang on a car bound for the scene.

Arriving there the Chief found a good appearing young man, evidently a "knight of the road," lying flat upon his back with a large cap pulled down over his eyes, and lying with his head on a piece of lawn not a foot from the roadside. From all appearance it looked as though the man had drawn his last breath.

The chief knelt down beside the form, while the eager crowd serged [sic] around him, all endeavoring to get a look at the victim, and began to make an investigation or rather an examination of the pulse. Then a young lady weepingly exclaimed, "Oh! is he dead, Mr. Lane?"

Chief Lane arose from his kneeling position . . . and a smile spread over his countenance. "Folks," he said, "he's the livest dead man I've ever found! That's straight, too!" Then he shook the young fellow and said something about "taking the roadside for a hotel," then shook the sleeping figure again--and then some more.

Suddenly the sleeper awoke with a start, "Gosh! what's the difficulty?" he desired to know. The young man gave his name as Ed. Cantor, formerly a stationary fireman at Brooklyn, but for the past few years has been doing the "road" stunt." He said he was on his way north, when he became fatigued and footsore, so he sat down to rest and must have fell asleep. "I'm a very sound sleeper," he added.

On the young man's request, the Chief took him to the station house, where in the care of Officer Kennedy he was taken to jail to receive medical treatment and food.

Oil Spill Update

The Department of Environmental Conservation has issued a statement about the oil spill in Germantown: "DEC Statement on Germantown spill response."

Oil Spill on the Hudson

The Register-Star reported last night that there was an oil spill on the Hudson River near Germantown. The spill, which was noticed shortly before 5 p.m. on Sunday, is believed to have been caused by "a transfer line that fell from a tanker ship traveling southbound on the Hudson River." The oil spilled is very likely Bakken crude oil, which we learned last month, is highly volatile and extremely difficult to clean up. It is estimated that a successful clean up would only capture 20 or 25 percent of the oil spilled.

The Register-Star was posted online at 7:17 p.m. and updated at 7:49 p.m. with the promise of further updates. So far, there have been none.

Channel 10 News has a report about the spill which can be seen here. According to this report, what was spilled was not crude oil but fuel oil.

A Week of Meetings Ahead

On Monday, August 18, Hudson FORWARD holds its second meeting, at 1 North Front Street. At 6:30, there's a presentation by Victor Mendolia: [Hudson] Government 101. Sheena Salvino is also expected to talk about the City's alphabet agencies: HDC and HCDPA. The regular meeting of Hudson FORWARD begins at 7 p.m.

On Tuesday, August 19, it's the regular monthly meeting of the Common Council at 7 p.m., preceded by the Finance Committee meeting at 5:30 p.m. Both take place at City Hall.

On Wednesday, August 20, the Zoning Board of Appeals holds a public hearing on the four-unit apartment building proposed for the corner of Fairview Avenue and Bayley Boulevard. The public hearing begins at 6 p.m., followed by the regular monthly meeting of the ZBA at 6:30 p.m. Both take place at City Hall.

On Thursday, August 21, the Common Council Economic Development Committee meeting takes place at 6 p.m. at City Hall. It's a meeting worth attending, since all manner of things are considered under the umbrella of economic development.

On Friday, August 22, the Historic Preservation Commission meets at 10 a.m. at City Hall. This is the meeting at which the HPC is only supposed to approve the language of the certificates of appropriateness prepared by legal counsel, but you never know what will happen.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Join the Local History Detectives

On Friday, someone contacted Gossips seeking help in identifying the people in a family photo album. The album, made up of pictures taken in Hudson in the early decades of the 20th century, found its way to an antique shop in South Burlington, Vermont. The goal is to identify the people portrayed in the album, locate their descendants, and return the album to them. To help accomplish that, Gossips has permission to publish a few of the pictures from the album--some because they are just interesting pictures of Hudson probably never seen before, others because they provide clues to the identity of the family whose album it is.

The first picture falls into the category of "just interesting." It shows the corner of Warren and Fourth streets, early in the 20th century, with more people on the street than are usually seen in historic pictures. One possible explanation is that it is Sunday morning, and these folks are heading to the First Presbyterian Church. If that's the case, the presence of the baby carriage may suggest that the child inside is being taken to the church for baptism, but that's only a surmise.

Also among the pictures in the album is this one of the office of the Gifford-Wood Company, when it was located at the end of Hudson Avenue. It is said that this building still survives beneath what is there now.

The next picture is both of interest and of importance in identifying the family in the album. It is assumed that these women are either neighbors or family members, and the street is the street where the family lived. But what street is it? Where in Hudson are these houses located?

Many of the pictures in the album were taken in front of the same house--the house where this young couple are standing with a baby carriage, apparently the same one seen in the picture of Warren and Fourth streets.

This picture shows the entire house.

   
It is thought that, because the baby carriage appears in the photograph of Warren and Fourth streets, the house was in close proximity to that corner. Searching Hudson on Google, the people trying to locate the house thought it might be 360 Columbia Street, the house that now belongs to Operation Unite.

The size and placement of the windows is similar, the lintels over the windows seem the same, the entrance is a few steps up from the sidewalk, and the door is recessed, but the hood over the door is missing (this happens) and the roof line is different (this happens, too, although there appears to be no obvious evidence that it happened with this house). 

The pictures toward the end of the album (it is assumed they are arranged in chronological order) were probably taken during or soon after World War I (1917-1918). (Someone in uniform is posing in front of the house.) In all the pictures, the house appears unchanged. In this 1931 aerial picture of Hudson, however, 360 Diamond Street appears with the gabled roof that it has today. Is it possible that the roof was altered at some time between 1918 and 1931?

The only picture in the album that gives a hint about the location of the house is this one, where the house number appears over the door and the only number that can be made out is a 3.

The assumption is that this house was located on the same street that appears in the third picture above--a street that is considerably narrower than any street in Hudson today. The narrowness of the street suggests that this could be Chapel Street, the street that ran from Second Street to North Front Street between Columbia and State and was obliterated during Urban Renewal.

More pictures from the album can be seen on Flickr. If you have any ideas about the location of the house or the identity of the people, please post them in comments on Gossips or contact the people who have the album directly. Their contact information is provided on the Flickr page. 
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Photos courtesy Mary Heinrich Aloi, Vintage Inspired Lifestyle Marketplace

West Wall Revealed

As the demolition of the 1957 garage at the Armory continues, more and more of the original west wall of the building is coming into view.

What was hidden by the garage is a row of windows on the ground floor, which have been bricked up, reminiscent of arrow slits and similar to those along the State Street side of the building.

The link provided in a comment yesterday by "Prison Alley" leads to the New York State Military Museum website and a series of pictures of the Hudson Armory dating from the early 1950s, before the garage was built. Among them is this picture of the Short Street side of the building.

Since the plan to build a new addition to the building in the footprint of the garage was abandoned, the project has not been back before the Historic Preservation Commission. It seems that it probably should. Whatever is intended for this side of the building, they are now dealing with historic fabric, and the proposed treatment should require a certificate of appropriateness. Wouldn't it be grand if the intention were to open up the windows again? But that would probably entail some changes to the design for the interior space since the plans of the library were made with the assumption that this would be not an exterior wall but a shared wall with the proposed medical wing.

Maybe the plans have already been modified to take advantage of more sources of natural light, but that's not known. No plans appear on the library's website and the ones on the architect's website don't seem to be up-to-date.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Not to Be Missed

This article about the upcoming Democratic primary in New York appeared on Friday in The Nation: "How Zephyr Teachout Became a Contender."

Venus Elsewhere

As the debate over the proper location of Venus was heating up earlier this week, a reader, in an email, pointed out that ours was not the only Venus fountain in New York. There is one in Wolcott, just west of Syracuse, and it is the town's pride and joy.

The statue is located in the Village of Wolcott, at the four corners. It was installed in September 1913, exactly thirty years after Hudson's Venus fountain was completed in September 1883. When our Venus fountain was installed in 1883, the Hudson Evening Register described it as "exhibiting in the most effective manner the power of our water supply, and proving that it can be put to ornamental as well as useful purposes." Similarly, the fountain in Wolcott was installed with the advent of a public water system in the village. It was thought that there should be some kind of public drinking fountain "for both man and beast" at the site of the old town pump, and the fountain was apparently meant to serve that purpose.

The statue in Wolcott, according to waymarking.com, "depicts Venus rising from the sea, being lifted from the depths by two cupids and two fish. This statue is made of cast iron and is one of only eight still known to exist in North America."

The statue in Wolcott, without the lamp above her head, is the spitting image of our Venus. (That's our Venus at the left above, Wolcott's at the right.) Investigating the claim that Wolcott's statue is "one of only eight still known to exist in North America" led to the discovery of a book called Zinc Sculpture in America 1850-1950, by Carol A. Grissom. (Although Wolcott claims their Venus is cast iron, and someone at the last meeting about Seventh Street Park reported that our Venus was made from lead, it seems they are both made from zinc, a material introduced for statuary in the mid-19th century and used to produce "modestly priced serial sculpture displayed throughout the nation on fountains, public monuments, and war memorials.")

Here is the description of the statue from Grissom's book:

VENUS RISING FROM THE SEA, nearly naked, holds a swirl of drapery between her upraised right and her left hand at her hips. The sculpture was designed by Charles Cordier (1827-1925) for a Parisian fountain featuring the triumph of Amphitrite (1862). A similar sculpture was modeled in Berlin by Friedrich Drake, but no copies of it are known.

The statue was installed on a fountain in the Horticulture Building at the Columbia Exposition in Chicago in 1893, and it was popular, with eighteen copies listed here. It was available with and without two cherubs riding dolphins at Venus's feet. . . .

What's interesting is that Hudson's Venus was installed on the fountain in the Public Square ten years before it appeared in the Horticulture Building at the Columbia Exposition in Chicago. Hudson was a trendsetter! 

Grissom visited our Venus in 2001, and here's the description of it that appears in her list:

NEW YORK, HUDSON, 444 Warren Street; previously corner of Sixth and Columbia Streets; before 1976, Seventh Street Park

Aphrodite Fountain (between 1878 and 1900)

Cast zinc; white paint

In storage awaiting treatment (now filled with concrete); previously on a concrete pad at Sixth and Columbia Streets; originally installed atop a two-pan cast-iron fountain at the center of the park

Thirteen years later, our Venus is still "in storage awaiting treatment."

COPYRIGHT 2014 CAROLE OSTERINK

Thanks to Lisa Walsh Makas for inspiring this investigation