Patriquin Architects Photo
Following on a meeting at the Historic District Commission (HDC) about a major expansion of the historic Copps Island/Norm Bloom & Sons oyster farm on Quinnipiac Avenue, architects invited all abutting neighbors to contribute alternative ideas. Two proposed new massive, view-altering, riverine buildings proved controversial.
The meeting, held in the third floor conference space at Patriquin Architects, on Grand Avenue and Front Street, drew only a handful of neighbors. They made up for their numbers by proposing a massive rethinking and reconfiguration of the plan
Two sticking points emerged from the HDC meeting. (The business needs HDC approval because the farm is in the Quinnipiac River Historic District.)
The first concern: that the commissioners might ultimately balk on the proposed lifting up of two modest historical structures from their albeit crumbling foundations onto a plinth or platform. The plan would save them from future damage from flooding. But it might also uproot their context.
The second concern took up the lion’s share of the hour-and-half meeting, which took place the third week of December. It centered on the massive size of what is being called the Oyster House, the processing facility near the northern end of the property; as well as the large new Hatchery building farther south and abutting the river, also a large building. Neighbors called both proposed structures, especially the Oyster House, visually shocking for the residential style of the district.
The oyster farm viewed from the west, at Grand Ave and Front Street.
The reconfiguration plan designed by Karin Patriquin and colleague Paolo Campos juggles concerns of historical appropriateness along with demands of new mechanical equipment being in a flood plain. It also addresses the requirement of the new buildings being tall enough to house operations of forklifts and other equipment required to process large cages of mollusks.
Both sides were sympathetic to the others’ concerns. Patriquin and her team started the meeting by showing how in post-HDC revisions, the Oyster House on the northern margin of the property has been moved some four feet away from the property of abutting homeowners Donna Curran and Patrick McCaughey, its roof lowered, and its mass reduced, in part by added railing along the river-facing side that opens up the view.
Curran still expressed concern about the roof-top mechanicals in the Oyster House, with the potential buzz of their noise so close by,. She asked what activities would be taking place in the below-the roof second floor space, also close to their house.
Answer: office and administrative activities, which could not be put on a lower level because the entire operation, in the midst of a flood plain, requires, for all the electrical features, from conduits to wall switches, to be elevated.
Ozyck flips model for Patriquin.
Chris Ozyck, whose late 19th century Victorian faces the current driveway entrance to the farm, began his critique with the precariousness of the architects pursuing these modest adjustments after having heard the commissioners’ ardent skepticism about moving the two historic structures from their locations.
“If you can’t, how do you solve your problems?” Ozyck asked. “If you can’t move them, you’ll be up against it” with the entire plan.
Not so unexpectedly, Ozyck had a serious alternate suggestion, and a drawing of his idea in his pocket.
“It’s not my property,” he began diplomatically, “and I want to support you 100 percent. But we’ve got to get to a place where we all, you and the neighborhood, feel comfortable. I’m happy it’s not condos, but I do want it to work, and the northern edge is problematical.”
So Ozyck proposed flipping the current plan of the Oyster House area so that at least one of the smaller buildings could stay in place. He suggested moving the Oyster House to the other side, significantly farther away from the northern edge of the property and farther up the steep hill, to be screened by trees but nearer to Quinnipiac Avenue.
That, however, would necessitate losing the current driveway for the trucks to enter. And it would create a new curb cut and driveway in the middle of the property.
Ozyck’s alternate plan drawing.
An animated discussion ensued about vehicle circulation — whether turning radii would be sufficient — and whether the resulting work area in front of the Oyster House and down by the river, where the boats offload, would be sufficiently open.
Sympathetic to these concerns and to history, Patriquin, whose own historic building was winged by a stolen car the day before, reminded Ozyck and the others that the site has always included large buildings.
“They were not as tall along the waterfront,” Ozyck said.
He added that even smaller alterations will “have a deadening impact.”
Northern neighbors to the farm, Curran and McCaughey.
Curran and McCaughey expressed support for Ozyck’s suggestion, which he went on to elaborate both through his drawing and a 3D-computer generated model of the proposed farm that the architects had produced.
Quinnipiac Avenue resident and furniture designer Dan Kopps added, “I love what you guys are doing. And I support your right to farm. We just don’t want something that looks like the tanks, that feels industrial.”
After listening patiently, Campos said, “We can’t study this to death, indefinitely.”
“I know this is pissing you off, but it’s a better fit,” countered Ozyck.
Ozyck’s alternative “is a solution,” added Curran. “It preserves the look of the neighborhood, and it moves the mechanicals firmly onto the farm.”
Norm and Jimmy Bloom at the table, with the model.
And how did the Blooms respond?
“We want to please people,” said Norm Bloom.
There was, however, a sense of looming deadline. The next scheduled meeting of the HDC, to which proposed new iterations must be presented, is Jan. 9.
Patriquin, taking careful notes, did term Ozyck’s suggestion a “major move,” requiring in part permission to put in a new driveway, among other big issues, such as circulation of vehicles in the main work areas of the farm.
The meeting ended on a high note with Patriquin saying she and her team will address the concerns of neighbors, run it all by the Blooms, then see what they are then authorized to proceed with changing. She said they’d try to do that in time to make the January meeting. And if not that, then in February.
The current HDC application runs 65 days. The February meeting would fall within that time, said lawyer Bernard Pellegrino, who also was attending the meeting.
“Your success is ours,” said Ozyck.
“It’s very exciting,” said McCaughey “We’re very happy neighbors’ voices are being heard.”
“We’re excited,” said Jimmy Bloom, Norm’s son. “You guys are good neighbors. We are trying to balance everything.”
Oyster House, as presented to HDC.
Nice to see appropriate discussion sbout a great use, and economic generator for an historic USE in an historic district.
The Architects have a good plan, the neighbors seem to be on board with the project with concerns that can be addressed.
Curb cuts should not be a project killer.
Well reported by the Independent.
This is how good contextual development should happen.
Bill MacMullen