[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6020024,"mediaKeyId","5770920-e8ab373ab12d2ac2834196966d64cf38","parentId",5770920,"title","Holland Avenue Tudor district nomination advances to Common Council subcommittee for further review","audioSeconds",343,"startMs",5919000,"endMs",6262000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5770920-e8ab373ab12d2ac2834196966d64cf38&start=5919&end=6262","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5770920-e8ab373ab12d2ac2834196966d64cf38/thumbnail_5919000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6020024/Albany-City/Albany-County/New-York/Holland-Avenue-Tudor-district-nomination-advances-to-Common-Council-subcommittee-for-further-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6020024-e73c45323ce3f5ad6d7d17f5e6ec0775/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146401&Signature=Mjohy3iiTDoLm-Pe4Jtz4y2ZbIf7O6Cx94IcKoEzEYynFpDJWK6l9UoEfst-dyi9fbz2AO3pdXq0be9jprzYM6bqiVRc2N4IEW8MYQFXdZl7gLTaGnvrpRusLUpauevDhRmDYWPh-nbfmQ9VyWuVHyzFMDTzgwFDM6gmOcRuGgmNWkZjWXSxCV9lYoKP3Fyk5slQMA23kKkKs4DZ0BA8Wru1wTZhhoN3I7j89YN9niKydGKgTst8HSuFgbDa97BVcY825rrmoNPLvN5-4JR-x85sIu97N1uTDWEEO5keYsMKco1M-JC8H4~QTTy0zxI1-3S9qHDplegcOmy-p~tONw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Albany, NY","date","2025-09-05T11:51:59Z","article","A proposed Holland Avenue Tudor Historic District advanced for initial review on Sept. 10 when the Common Council’s Land Use and Economic Development Subcommittee heard presentations from the Historic Albany Foundation and the property owner and then invited follow‑up discussions and additional information before making a recommendation to the full council.

The subcommittee meeting was the first of what staff and council members indicated is likely to be several sessions before the subcommittee votes to recommend the nomination to the full Common Council. The Historic Albany Foundation presented in support of the district. Representatives of Peacock Companies and their attorneys also attended and spoke. Planning department staff and Historic Resources Commission representatives were present to answer questions.

Why it matters: local historic‑district designation would add regulatory review for exterior changes within the proposed district boundaries and could affect redevelopment options for the buildings included in the nomination.

At the hearing, council members asked detailed questions about ownership history, vacancy status, prior uses, and the buildings’ physical condition. Council Member Sergio Adams, whose ward includes the Tudor buildings, told the subcommittee he had toured the properties with a contractor and described them as generally stable but in need of repairs such as wiring and bathrooms. By contrast, another commenter, Tom Hoey, said in his assessment the rehabilitation cost could be “$500,000-plus per building” and questioned financial feasibility. That divergence prompted council members to request more technical assessments and clarified the process for designation.

After presentations and public comment, council members invited city staff, the Historic Albany Foundation and Peacock Companies to remain for an informal forum to discuss questions raised during the hearing; the session was open to the public and was live streamed. Planning staff said the subcommittee’s first hearing functioned primarily as an information‑gathering session to provide background for future deliberations and that additional subcommittee hearings are likely.

What’s next: staff said they will notify interested parties about the date of the next subcommittee meeting. Commissioners and preservation advocates suggested members of the Historic Resources Commission could offer building‑condition expertise or accompany council members on site visits if the subcommittee wishes technical input before forming a recommendation.

Ending: No formal action to designate the district was taken at the subcommittee’s first hearing; the nomination remains under review and the subcommittee will schedule additional meetings before issuing a recommendation to the full Common Council.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Albany Historic Resources Commission","oneSentenceSummary","A first Common Council subcommittee hearing provided background on a proposed Holland Avenue Tudor Historic District designation and invited follow‑up meetings and information from preservation advocates, the property owner and planning staff.","taxTitle","Albany City, Albany County, New York","taxId",3731,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6020029,"Historic Resources Commission delays decision on Pearl Street garage conversion pending door designs and window condition details",1912,1356000,3268000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5770920-e8ab373ab12d2ac2834196966d64cf38&start=1356&end=3268","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5770920-e8ab373ab12d2ac2834196966d64cf38/thumbnail_1356000.jpg","/articles/6020029/Albany-City/Albany-County/New-York/Historic-Resources-Commission-delays-decision-on-Pearl-Street-garage-conversion-pending-door-designs-and-window-condition-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6020029-57369b6336255ad7e907e30995662422/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146401&Signature=UqFY9~8drmuL885ndF1Ed98LaKsLse50XQkweOcXm0syJlw4WFh2sp-kLl6ooibHZzVoiRdoWsKclkoZfKpuioQmPq2sTNcCykvDdngt2PIDGid2JqkzlkXqiG4NBjiXmVyo~wtPMlPsf2k0b6-ecGqsCowRB~d9YJXkmpTlIM9Oi0LzvhACZ6-37ClqzBo20~3Dat7rBsZiCzBzBUblsKwMV75kT4-hOfgRzEDURNJmBKK9XQmw4FNpBN~Pg1m6ErV72ExiChHGO5DjSAObAuAxjLs-LVcduWim2nIwzR5wX6f2ixJ~hztSpqETw0L8Ey4x3IMHGzSlWNM7n~uL7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Historic Resources Commission on Sept. 11 deferred a decision on a proposed conversion of an existing garage on North Pearl Street after commissioners said the applicant must provide more detailed door designs that better reflect a carriage‑house appearance and additional documentation on the condition of existing windows. The commission also discussed options for siding the garage’s exposed concrete‑block wall and structural repairs before making a decision.

Commissioners said the proposed window replacements and the plan to cut the existing garage opening into two entrances raised historic‑character questions and that the commission needed more information on whether original windows are repairable or must be replaced. Commissioners and staff asked the applicant to submit photographs, a condition investigation for the windows proposed for replacement, and alternative door elevations showing a carriage‑house treatment before the commission reconsidered the application.

Why it matters: the commission must balance preserving historic character with allowing adaptive reuse. Decisions on materials, window repair versus replacement, and how much of the exposed block wall is altered affect the property’s appearance and the commission’s precedent for other small commercial‑to‑residential conversions in the neighborhood.

At the meeting, discussion centered on three technical areas: windows, the garage entrance/door design, and the concrete‑block wall treatment. On windows, commissioners said several openings appear significantly deteriorated and asked for a clearer, window‑by‑window condition record for the units proposed for replacement. The applicant and company representatives described the proposed replacement material as a composite (a wood‑fiber and thermoplastic blend often marketed as Fibrex or comparable composites). Commissioners said they preferred wood windows for visual and material authenticity unless the applicant provided justification for an alternate material that met preservation criteria and tax‑credit compatibility.

On the garage entrance, the commission and the applicant discussed multiple configuration options. Commissioners favored breaking the nine‑foot opening into two equal leaves with a vestibule behind the door openings to produce a carriage‑house look and encouraged design details such as heavy base trim, vertical board patterns, or transoms that read as historic carriage openings rather than modern panel doors. The applicant agreed to provide two rendered options to illustrate a carriage‑house solution that both fits the floor plan and preserves the building’s exterior character.

The commission also spent substantial time on the building’s south and long side concrete‑block wall, which exhibits spalling and section loss in the upper courses. Staff and commissioners discussed interventions ranging from localized block replacement and coping repair to attaching a fiber‑cement or masonry‑look panel system to create a more uniform appearance. Commissioners noted that much of the block wall historically may have been utilitarian and not intended for public display; nevertheless, because it is now visible from the public way, the commission reviewed approaches that would be visually compatible with the neighborhood. The applicant said portions of the block would be removed and replaced where crumbling; one speaker estimated replacing about 50 blocks in the worst areas and proposed framing to receive siding where necessary.

Formal action: a commissioner moved to defer the application pending submission of: (1) alternate door elevations and a carriage‑house door design; (2) photographic documentation and a condition investigation for the windows proposed for replacement; and (3) renderings showing the proposed siding/panel options. The motion was seconded and the commission did not vote to approve the project at the meeting. The applicant committed to submit two renderings and additional material for the commission’s review at a future meeting, with the next HRC meeting scheduled for Oct. 9.

The commission asked staff to clarify how the proposed replacement materials align with tax‑credit standards and local preservation guidelines and whether prior approvals or the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) standards apply to specific replacement scenarios. The applicant said manufacturer samples and previously used samples have been shown to the commission and that they would provide material cut samples and renderings at the next hearing.

The commission’s deferral preserves the record for a future, more detailed review of material choices and historic compatibility. The decision delays the applicant’s ability to obtain building permits that depend on final exterior approvals, but commissioners signaled that they would consider a staff‑level review of materials if the applicant’s follow‑up submittal addresses the commission’s concerns and provides the requested documentation.

Ending: The applicant agreed to return with the requested door designs, detailed window condition documentation, material samples, and renderings for review at a future Historic Resources Commission meeting. The commission left the record open and did not take a final vote on the application at the Sept. 11 hearing.","The Historic Resources Commission deferred action on a proposed conversion of a North Pearl Street garage after commissioners asked for carriage‑house‑style door designs and more detailed evidence on window deterioration and proposed replacement materials.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Holland Avenue Tudor district nomination advances to Common Council subcommittee for further review

Historic Resources Commission delays decision on Pearl Street garage conversion pending door designs and window condition details