Saratoga Springs design board approves multiple exterior projects, sets conditions on window and roof details

The Saratoga Springs Design Review Board on Oct. 9 approved a string of applications ranging from residential gutters to a motel’s window replacements while requiring extra technical checks for some items.

The board approved historic‑review work at 26 5th Avenue (gutters and downspouts) and voted to approve a scupper and downspout plan at 30 Whistler Court with one explicit condition: the meeting minutes and project materials are to be forwarded to the building department for a review of technical functionality. Resident Mark Richardson urged the board during public comment to consider drainage and long‑term performance, saying the earlier contractor quote showed “a 145 foot diverter and one downspout” and that additional scuppers were added only after the city intervened. The chair moved the Whistler Court approval, and the motion passed with one opposed.

At 142 Henry Street, architect Sean Korp presented revised elevations that lower the roof two feet, add two small upper‑level windows to Unit 301, and refine porch and pilaster details. The board voted to approve the three‑family project and allowed the client to add trim framing to the spandrel panels; the motion carried after a brief discussion about whether the two rear windows should be optional or required.

For 153 Van Dam the board praised the applicant’s responsiveness but required follow‑up detail. Erin Maciel’s application for an addition and exterior modifications was approved in principle, but the board excluded roof‑trim details and certain window‑profile approvals pending submittal of sections and profiles. The board and representatives from the Saratoga Springs Preservation Foundation asked that board‑and‑batten in the gable be replaced with shingles or horizontal clapboard and that a fascia board be introduced to separate materials in the gable.

The board addressed two larger commercial/residential matters in one session. Owner Ashish Gandhi sought partial approval to replace numerous motel windows at 248 Broadway. The board told the applicant that non‑original vinyl windows may be replaced in kind, but the large, character‑defining picture windows should be repaired where feasible and may not be replaced with vinyl without the board’s further review; staff asked the applicant to produce a numbered window schedule and photographs documenting any windows the owner believes are beyond repair.

At 33 Franklin the board approved a rebuild of an existing rear fire‑escape configuration using steel structure and composite decking and supported replacing 1980s/1990s vinyl windows with higher‑grade clad wood (Andersen 400 series) in the existing altered openings. The board asked the applicant to provide clearer cut‑sheets for railings and connections for the record.

A substantial schematic review of 76 Walton generated the most discussion. Designer Kennedy Flack and builder Tom Brazil outlined a rear addition that replaces a dilapidated annex and adds a two‑story, glass‑backed volume. Board members commended the applicant for preserving and repairing character‑defining front elements — the board emphasized keeping the wood front steps, tower shutters and the existing front door — but raised concerns about new visible openings and certain modern details (notably a proposed shed dormer and round windows in the rear). Preservation Foundation staff and multiple board members urged minimizing cuts into original brickwork and ensuring the addition reads as a subordinate, clearly differentiated element. Because demolition or removal of the rear annex had not been properly noticed, staff advised the applicant that a formal “determination of significance” public notice and demolition notice must be filed before the board can vote on any demolition; the applicant agreed to work with staff on the required notice and documentation.

Board actions were narrowly procedural on several items: approvals were typically conditional on technical review or on submittal of sections, window profiles, or window schedules. The board closed the meeting with reminders about the next meeting (Oct. 23) and an Oct. 20 Preservation Foundation program on infill design.

Votes at a glance

• 26 5th Avenue (gutters/downspouts): Approved (consent). • 30 Whistler Court (scupper/downspout): Approved with condition that minutes/materials be forwarded to the building department for technical review; recorded as passing with one opposed. • 142 Henry Street (three‑family): Approved; client may add additional trim to frame spandrels (motion passed). • 153 Van Dam (addition/exterior modifications): Approved in bulk; approval excludes roof trim and window‑profile details pending submittal and review; board required replacement of gable board‑and‑batten with shingles or clapboard and addition of fascia. • 248 Broadway (motel windows): Small, non‑original vinyl windows may be replaced in kind; large original picture windows must be documented and repaired rather than replaced with vinyl unless the board agrees replacement is necessary. • 33 Franklin (fire escape/windows): Approved (steel escape, window upgrades); applicant to provide railing cut‑sheets. • 76 Walton (rear addition): No vote on demolition or final approval — the board provided extensive design guidance; applicant must file a determination of significance / demolition notice before any demolition vote.

What to expect next

Applicants who received conditional approvals were instructed to submit the missing technical documents (roof‑trim sections, window profiles, and window schedules) or to coordinate with the building department as required. For 76 Walton, staff will post the required notice and place the determination/demolition item on a future agenda after the applicant supplies the required historic documentation and staff posts public notice.

(Quotes in this report are drawn from the meeting record and attributed to speakers who identified themselves in the transcript.)