HomeMy WebLinkAbout20240720 30-30 1/2 Caroline Building Expansion Public Comment (71)Outlook
Online Form Submittal: Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment
From noreply@civicplus.com <noreply@civicplus.com>
Date Sun 5/4/2025 12:03 AM
To Mark Graham <Mark.Graham@saratoga-springs.org>; beige.berryman@saratoga-springs.org
<beige.berryman@saratoga-springs.org>
Land Use Board Agenda Public Comment
SUBMIT COMMENTS REGARDING CITY PROJECTS
Thank you for submitting your comments. Your feedback will be forwarded to the
City's Planning Department and Land Use Board members. NOTE: Comments
submitted later than 12:00 noon on the day before the Land Use Board meeting
may not be reviewed prior to their meeting. All comments will be added to the
project file in the Planning Department.
Land Use Board Design Review Board
Name Gregory Hubbard
Email Address gkhubbard53@yahoo.com
Business Name Gregory Kent Hubbard, Historic Preservation Consultant for the
Hospitality Industry
Address 11427 Porter Ranch Dr
City Porter Ranch
State California
Zip Code 91326
Phone Number (818) 818-6083
Project Name 30-30 1/2 Caroline Street, Saratoga Springs, New York
Project Number 20250270
Project Address 30-30 1/2 Caroline Street, Saratoga Springs,
Comments The real tragedy of Saratoga is most of the new and remodeled
buildings have nothing to do with the city’s extraordinary
architectural heritage. These proposed alterations could have
been designed for a site on the moon as far as the sense of
history they reflect.
Concerns about the alterations is like arguing over the
5/5/25, 7:45 AM Mail - Mark Graham - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGIxYTcxODdiLTE4ZmUtNDdlMy05MTNlLTA4ZjY5NTFhMDAzMQAQAPMY%2FYhsfdROhH0IYcmek…1/2
Emperor’s Clothes. It's pointless.
The original design is lumpy, the color is bad, the proportions
worse, nothing that even remotely ties in with the city’s
distinguished architectural history. The proposed alteration will
make it much worse, not better, and far, far too big for the
historic district.
To judge how far this building and the proposed changes miss
the mark, simply compare it to the building on the corner. That
building is simple, straightforward, and without bluster, fits in. It
was created to reflect an architect's ego. The windows with
glazing bars are similar to the surviving landmarks all over the
city, the floor heights are similar. The well laid brickwork
complementary. You could double, even triple the number of
windows, and it would still fit in. You don’t need muntin-less
windows the size of a king size bed, repeated unchanged,
across the façade, side to side, and floor to floor to provide the
residents with a handsome view.
There are many 19th century buildings in this city whose
handsome design would supply any creative architect with a
pattern of broad windows that had enough Victorian character
that they would satisfy the essential need for contextural
architecture while still supplying modern clients with the broad
windows this client feels they require.
Ditch the current design, and substitute something that actually
looks like it belongs in this handsome city.
Attach Photo (optional)Field not completed.
Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
5/5/25, 7:45 AM Mail - Mark Graham - Outlook
https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGIxYTcxODdiLTE4ZmUtNDdlMy05MTNlLTA4ZjY5NTFhMDAzMQAQAPMY%2FYhsfdROhH0IYcmek…2/2