Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 306 316 Main Street Materials topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural consultant presses developer to reduce EIFS exposure on 6-story Main Street proposal
Summary
Natalie Quinn of KARC Planning Consultants told the Poughkeepsie City Planning Board that the 306–316 Main Street proposal now uses aluminum composite panels on the sixth floor, but the board's architectural consultant urged the applicant to reduce reliance on EIFS on large, visible façades.
Natalie Quinn of KARC Planning Consultants presented changes to the 306–316 Main Street proposal, saying the applicant revised the sixth-floor cladding to an aluminum composite panel and altered the sixth-floor railing pattern after the board's architectural consultant recommended changes.
The board's architectural consultant raised concerns about the use of exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) on large, visible facades. The consultant said the most common EIFS finish "tends to trap air particulate" and warned it "will be extremely difficult to clean at 5 stories tall," recommending smoother finishes or alternative cladding for long-term maintenance.
Quinn said the team retained EIFS on portions of the building facing the interior courtyard and Cannon Street but added coordinated reveals and divisions to reduce monotony. She said the team would provide enlarged renderings of the courtyard elevations and explore color and finish changes for the EIFS; she also said converting the entire courtyard elevation to the same aluminum panel used on the Main Street face would likely be financially unviable.
The architectural reviewer suggested alternatives such as fiber-cement (Hardie) panels, aluminum panels carried around the corner, deeper EIFS reveals, or other masonry or metal cladding on courtyard façades. Board members generally said the design had improved since earlier submissions but asked for further detail to ensure the rear and courtyard facades are not treated as a "forgotten" back side of the building.
Quinn said the project remains before the zoning board for a separate review and that the applicant asked the planning board to have a resolution drafted in case the zoning board advances the application. The planning board and applicant agreed to continue workshop-level review and to prepare additional renderings and material details for the next meeting.
Ending: No final approval; board asked for more detailed courtyard renderings, material samples or alternatives and a memo describing the team's response to maintenance concerns and EIFS alternatives.
