HomeMy WebLinkAbout20240720 30-30 1/2 Caroline Building Expansion Public Comment (72)To: Design Review Board
From: Rick Fenton
Subject: 30-30 ½ Caroline Street
Date: June 23, 2025
Downtown is where larger mixed-use buildings belong. With the mass and scale of the proposed 5-storey
building at 30-30 ½ Caroline Street approved, it is destined to be a very imposing addition to one of Saratoga’s
most iconic streets. The great majority of people will experience the building from the outside. Therefore, the
outcome of the board’s review of the exterior, its outlines, textures, and colors, will have a powerful impact on
the character of this prominent location for decades.
The board should honor the concerns about mass and scale expressed by the Preservation Foundation, as
well as the many negative public comments about the appearance of the building, at least by insisting that
the visual quality be improved. The left half of the building should offer more variation in window design
between floors, varied roof lines with bolder cornice treatments, and lighter colors. We should take
seriously the heavy, oppressive effect that the sight of a large building entirely wrapped in black will have
on this celebratory street, not to mention, on these alarmingly hot days, the impact of black surfaces on
absorbing and radiating heat. This is a nefarious trend. Too many buildings in town already have gone
the way of completely black trim, but none until now has gone so far as this. Saratoga is getting to look
more like the charred remains of a downtown in Mordor than a vibrant Victorian city.
__________________________________________________________
Background
The building must conform with the guidelines for the T-6 district laid out in Table 4-E, notably:
6. Facades must be divided into multiple “modules,” expressed through significant architectural changes such as
a change in materials, a change in pattern elements such as fenestration, columns or pilasters, or a change in
building setback through recesses or projections. For buildings 150’ in length or greater, such modules may be
no wider than 50
feet.
17. Roof forms may include symmetrical pitched roofs or flat roofs with cornice treatments. Slopes of pitched
roofs may not be less than 5:12, except that porch roofs may be sheds with pitches not less than 3:12.
18. Rooflines of 100’ in length or more must be varied through the use of architectural design elements
such as dormers, gables, or projected wall features. Such elements of variation may be no wider than 50’.
The site of the proposed building lies within the Architectural Review Overlay District. Therefore, the Board is
bound by the Architectural Review Approval Standards, section 13.9 I. of the Unified Development Ordinance,
notably:
9. c. Roofs
Features that give a roof its essential historic and architectural character must be retained and rehabilitated
whenever possible. Roof designs for new structures must be compatible with neighboring buildings.
10. Materials
Materials used in new construction must be compatible with those traditionally used in the neighboring
area. Contemporary materials may be acceptable provided that the overall texture, color, and details of the
2
building are compatible with neighboring buildings.
11. Colors
Colors used in new construction must be compatible with neighboring buildings. Architectural features of
historic buildings must be restored with colors and finishes appropriate to the nature of the materials and to the
historic character of the building. Where historically documented colors are not used, colors must be appropriate
to the building's predominant architectural style(s).
Comments
This massive building has been visually divided in two. While the right half largely exhibits suitable responses
to applicable UDO guidelines, the left half needs significant changes.
Fenestration: The right half shows fairly attractive variation in window design, the kind that makes the
neighboring buildings on the street interesting, with one style on the ground floor, another on the next two
floors, another on the fourth, and still another on the fifth. But the left half is almost all glass, with little
variation between modules. The effect is monotonous uniformity, like a wall of mirrors, all the same. Without
more wall substance between windows, the façade will be characterized very little by wall materials and colors
and mostly by glass and whatever interior window treatments each tenant goes with.
I found it helpful to compare images of the kinds of Victorian streetscapes people point to as ideals. Figure 1
illustrates the principles that underly our UDO guidelines – relatively narrow “modules” of individual character,
window designs changing between floors, variations in façade wall materials and colors, variations in roofline
with bold cornice treatments. From the dozens of comments you have received, a good guess would be that
most people would find Figure 1 much more attractive than the rendering of the proposed building in Figure 2.
Cornice treatments: The T-6 design standards require cornice treatments for flat roofs. However, the proposed
building gives but a token response. Compare Figures 1 and 2. A bolder treatment with brackets would give the
Figure 1 Figure 2
3
building more visual interest and make it more compatible with neighboring buildings. An elegant couple
shouldn’t step out into an evening without their hats.
Roofline Variation: Because the building appears to extend more than 100 feet along the street, it is subject to
the T-6 design standard requiring variation through design elements. A simple way to break up the long uniform
roof line would be to vary the heights of the right and left halves of the building. The buildings along the first
block of Caroline Street look this way. It’s a natural product of the construction of separate buildings, and would
significantly meet the goal of giving the appearance of 2 separate buildings here. Again, see Figure 1 for the
beneficial effect.
Colors: A bad case of mold is overtaking the city. One after another, no sooner has a new building gone up in
red or orange brick than all its ornamental detail is completely molded over. Cornices, brackets, panels,
columns, windows, doors – everything. A plague of moldy pumpkins. (See Appendix 1.) We all need to get out
there with buckets of Borax and vinegar. But this building – at least the left half – has gone all in. Can an entire
5-storey building meant to look like it stands alone be entirely black and truly be said to have colors compatible
with neighboring buildings? (Except of course at night in a blackout.) Does this building’s claim to a “modern”
design really give it a pass from fitting in with everything else on the street, or anything for blocks around?
People won’t feel safe walking past it. Please, if not color, at least a little lightening of tone in brown and gray,
even white or off-white. Yes, Sperry’s is important. Maybe the idea is to set the building back in a state of
perpetual shadow. But it would be so much better to incorporate Sperry’s into a harmonious color scheme that
would work to enliven the whole composition. Even something like making the setback and sides a lighter color
- leaving the darker brick around Sperry’s. It’s your last chance. The last chance for all of us. Please do
something ! Just think of the possibilities. . .
Light instead of dark! Great cornices! Balconies!
4
World HQ for the storage of … caskets?
Just 4 mold-free squares left.
Lunch time!
Orange is the new…no, black is the new…wait, what is it now?
Love this place. They even have black sheets!
Black diamonds! Who knew?
Appendix 1. The Vampires’ Gruesome Gallery of Moldy Pumpkins. Is there still hope?
`