Ingersoll mansion move approved

Despite fervent appeals from several town residents, the Niskayuna Planning Board unanimously agreed to let a moving company lift the historic Stanford mansion off its foundation and deposit it close to State Street.

The former Ingersoll Residence retirement home has stood at the same spot for 200 years. It will be moved soon, Planning Board members believe.

Highbridge Development asked for permission to move and rotate the historic building so it could be included in a larger retail space paralleling State Street. The new plan has nine buildings, the largest being a 19,240-square-foot retail space that would include the former mansion. Only a couple of businesses have signed leases so far, and Highbridge officials argued the change would make the development more attractive to the commercial world.

The Planning Board agreed.

Board member Morris Auster said the long delay in construction — no buildings have been erected since the plans were approved in 2007 — could be partly because the arrangement around the mansion didn’t appeal to businesses.

Construction was also delayed because of a legal challenge to the town’s original approval of the plan. Highbridge won in that case — but still, no work was done beyond leveling the stately trees that covered the property and demolishing an 80-year-old addition to the mansion.

Many view the result, a denuded site, as an aesthetic nightmare.

“This site as it sits is also a detriment,” said board Chairman Kevin Walsh, in explaining his reason for voting to move the mansion.

Auster added that the property looks so terrible now that it’s hurting all of Niskayuna.

“It kind of hurts the perception of this town,” he said.

Something needs to be done to jump-start commercial development, he said, noting that not one building was constructed while the mansion remained in the center of the property.

“Clearly that has not worked,” he said.

He and Walsh also argued that moving the mansion might save it. Highbridge officials had promised to restore the mansion when they got site plan approval in 2007.

“The building as it sits right now has fallen into disrepair,” Auster said.

Walsh also said he’s convinced the move will not damage or destroy the building.

“I feel we can move this building,” he said. “I feel comfortable in the literature submitted by the moving company.”

But he confessed that he’d rather see the site saved for historic purposes only.

“I’d like to see someone swoop down, hand us a million dollars, buy the property . . .,” Walsh said. “But that’s not what happened.”

Several residents begged the board to deny the move, which would eliminate any future historic designations for the building. Only structures on their original foundations can be considered. Historic designations protect buildings from being destroyed.

They also warned that the move could badly damage the building, and argued that Highbridge doesn’t care enough about the historic mansion to be trusted with the delicate task of moving it.

“You might as well give them a permit to destroy it,” resident Fred Thompson said.

He and others alleged that Highbridge left the building unlocked and vulnerable to vandalism, which board members seemed to agree had happened.

“It took no responsibility for the building,” Thompson said. “There’s vandalism inside. The outside is falling down. There’s no surveillance. It shows their disrespect for the building.”

Another resident, Lorrene Zabin, said the building’s historic nature would be better preserved if it was not moved to what will become a commercial strip.

“This 200-year-old building will sit with buildings that will have a lifespan of 10 years, maybe,” she said.

Others asked the board to reject the move as an apology for allowing Highbridge to clear-cut the trees around the mansion and turn the stately area into what they described as a strip mall.

“In view of what’s left to us, leave this building in place,” said Linda Champagne, who called Highbridge’s actions so far a “desecration.”

Resident John Wolcott went further. “This never should have happened,” he said. “The landscaping was so beautiful, only a monster with depraved indifference could do such a thing.”

He urged the board to stand firm and reject Highbridge’s new plan. “Now you’ve got a chance. A chance to make good,” he said.

No one from Highbridge spoke, but several others said they were in favor of the project.

“It’s my understanding the request is to move the building so it becomes more prominent. It seems to me that would be smart,” said a man who gave his name only as Carl. “Let’s move the structure. What is it, 200, 300 feet? Let some sales tax be generated so my house taxes go down.”

Another supporter, Leslie Gold, also said the mansion should be moved so that work can begin.

“I don’t think leaving it in its current state is going to help anybody,” she said. “I assume precautions are being taken so [the move] will be done properly.”

Champagne said most of those who support the move just want an end to the pain of seeing an abandoned house at the top of a bare hill.

“It looks ugly now and everyone thinks, just get rid of it now, get it out of sight,” she said. “But it’s not gone!”

She submitted a petition promising to boycott the commercial strip if the mansion is moved. She has gathered 200 signatures so far, she said. Every signer promised to never patronize the stores at the site.

She plans to continue passing that petition, she said.

Categories: Uncategorized