Harding window still in the news

This week's The Woodstock Independent (TWI) devoted a fair amount of space to the Woodstock City Council and the Hardings' renovation at 223 West Tryon Street. You know, that nasty old building that was the eye-sore of South Street and now is a very nice-looking building.

For all the time that was consumed with the window issue, the City probably could have just forked over $3,000 to Tom Harding and saved a lot of angst for everyone. But what we ended up with was the angst and the disappointment and the lost money blown on Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and City Council and staff duties (and don't forget the cost to have the City Attorney sit there through all the discussions).

The part that still nags away at me is that we still don't know the truth about what happened to the original window. As I commented to the City Council on March 2, Mr. Harding, Sr., had told them two weeks before that the west, first-floor window, which was supposed to be retained, ended up in the dumpster. Mr. Harding, Sr. did not say "The broken window ended up in the dumpster."

On March 2 Mr. Harding, Jr. told the City Council that the window had gotten broken and was removed.

Maybe I'm a nitpicker (OK, so I am), or maybe it's just that I listen carefully and compare what I hear. Those statements by the Hardings are two different statements.

Before the City Council blinked, it should have dug down for the truth. It should have demanded to know just who made the "honest" mistake, as Mr. Harding, Sr. called it. Was it the contractor? The architect? Was it one of the Hardings?

One way to get at the bottom of things would have been to examine the order for the double-hung windows. Was the first-floor, west window ordered at the same time as the other windows, well before it got broken (either by a worker ,while it was still in place? Or was it after after it either got broken or was removed and tossed into the dumpster)?

Some will say it doesn't matter. The HPC members who gave up an extra evening to show up at last week's City Council meeting were correct in the statements. The mayor required all except HPC Chairman Stebbins to address the Council as individuals, as it that made a difference. The audience recognized them as HPC members, and the City Council should have, also.

Read the Letters to the Editor in this week's TWI.

The HPC had made the right decision, for the right reasons. The Hardings should have been required to restore the architecturally-correct window on the west side of the first floor. As Nancy Fike wrote in her Letter to the Editor, "Protection of front facade windows in a historic district building is always a "big deal."

Except in Woodstock.