Electric Owl Studios Development Discussions Continue
Electric Owl Studios Development Discussions Continue
The Hastings location of the movie studio has been under discussion since 2022
By Kris DiLorenzo
Hastings-on-Hudson — The fate of the proposed Electric Owl Studios complex at 1 South Broadway in Hastings-on-Hudson is still under discussion. While some locals champion the new movie and television studio and the economic benefits it will bring to the area, it’s ruffling the feathers of other area residents who object to issues like potential increased traffic and noise. Electric Owl Studios has another location in Atlanta, Georgia.
Since Nov. 15, 2022, the various boards of the Hastings-on-Hudson village government have combed through the site plan application for the movie and TV studio, viewed presentations, gathered comments at public hearings, provided feedback, peppered the project team with questions, and requested adjustments to the plan.
Electric Owl owners Dan Rosenfelt and Mike Hahn purchased their 17.3-acre site from the Graham-Windham School at 1 Broadway, whose 23.97-acre campus, a National Register-eligible Historic District, features several Beaux Arts buildings. Hahn and Rosenfelt propose to build six 20,000-square-foot soundstages, three 20,000-square-foot mill buildings, and a parking garage, and will repurpose the school’s former administration building and five other buildings for office space.
The project, if approved, would be the world’s second purpose-built, state-of-the-art, LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Gold-certified multimedia studio; the first is Electric Owl’s Atlanta studio, opened in June 2023. The developers also intend to build studios in London and Los Angeles. (“Electric Owl” was a nickname for early 1900s nighttime train conductors. It now refers to a standalone electricity monitor showing energy consumption or cost per hour, or kwh, and giving a carbon dioxide reading.)
Hastings mayor Niki Armacost stated on the Village website that the Board of Trustees “believes the project will be good for the Village.”
Building Inspector Charles Minozzi, Junior, told the Current, “Electric Owl will have private security and sanitation services. The site is currently tax exempt, but any costs to the Village will be offset by tax revenues.”
At a June 20 Planning Board meeting, the studio was represented by Hahn, Daniel LoFrisco of Kimley-Horn Engineering and Landscape Architecture of New York, Jeff Scherr of Granoff Architects, and attorney William Null of Cuddy & Feder, LLC. Minozzi, Village planner Patrick Cleary, and attorney Linda Whitehead of McCullough, Goldberger & Staudt, LLP, represented the Village.
At the meeting, board member Kerry Gould-Schmit called the site “overbuilt,” saying the buildings are too big. Board member Ernesto Vigoreaux felt the project would be economically good for Hastings, but questioned its appearance. “What does the façade look like, what do the aesthetics look like?”
Null suggested one possible re-design: break up the mass of the three connected studio buildings by creating a notch between the first and second buildings and the second and third buildings, leaving about a 5-foot space, recessed 8 feet. “That would present, from a distance, as a separation of the buildings,” he said. This change and others, submitted to the board in July, were reflected in the applicant’s presentation at the board’s August 22 public hearing.
That presentation comprised renderings of the buildings and topography, and a 2-D “fly-through” of the site, showing changes made to the earlier plans. “We modified the southern façade; made a 10-foot setback, so the stage buildings have a 10- foot separation,” Null told the board. He also confirmed that the buildings would be lower than the Village’s 55-foot height limit, though the school’s Administration Building is 65 feet. However, the board’s request to shrink the buildings was a no-go.
“The challenge is that the trucks load from the driveway into the studio buildings,” David Moore of Granoff Architects explained. “Lowering the driveway would have to change the grade on the site to have buildings all accessed on the same level. We can’t lower the building height four to six feet to keep it feasible, operating as a studio building. A lot goes on top of the building: ventilation, lighting, catwalks, and other uses, and we need 44 feet clear in the space. We dropped the buildings as far as we could, but we can’t drop them further without creating dramatic grade changes everywhere, which would affect the garage, and the driveway’s adjacency to the Administration Building.”
The board had also voiced objections to the use of EIFS (exterior insulation and finish systems, or synthetic stucco) on the southern façade of the buildings. “That was a big request coming from the ARB (Architectural Review Board),” Planning Board chair Eva Alligood commented. The new plan showed brick and metal facades instead.
The presentation provided information on acoustical modifications to the mill buildings, photometric details about emergency lighting, the addition of a wrought iron fence separating the site from the school campus, and the number and types of trees that would screen the site from adjacent properties.
Moore talked about changes made to the parking garage. “The garage is now set into the ground by 10 feet on the western side of the site. We tried to nestle it into the hillside. It looks higher on the north side, facing the school, because the ground’s elevation is higher… We submerged the garage to the extent we could: two levels below grade. The school has access to the lowest level.”
He noted that the plan added “a fair amount” of landscaping to the back of the buildings, a “green wall” on one side of the garage, and a retaining wall with landscaping. The site also would include a pollinator garden and an apiary.
Of major importance was emergency vehicle access to the site. One-way traffic, a separate walkway for pedestrians, fire zone roadway striping, and a delineated loading area for each building would keep the roadway clear.
John Canning of Kimley-Horn (engineering, planning, and design consultants) stated, “We did provide a list of the size and type of trucks, specifically, three or four trucks a day, mostly box trucks; there is the occasional tractor-trailer.” He continued, “At each building is an area to park a box truck or tractor-trailer, depending on the building. They’d be out of the roadway and pedestrian areas. You unload from the rear of the truck; we can close the building to keep the noise down.”
The applicant has used acoustic consultant Merck Incorporated to measure sound levels inside and outside the buildings, and previously submitted a report. A projected lunch terrace adjacent to the mill building was scrapped because of neighbors’ concerns about sound; instead, there will be more screening.
The board discussed a conversation it had held with the Board of Trustees a year ago, about imposing conditions on a site plan approval that the boards would revisit a year later. The conditions could include a look at how traffic was working and whether additional improvements were necessary; a guarantee regarding landscaping, such as replacements that must be made; or a condition that all mill work be done within the building, with windows and doors closed, to prevent noise leakage in the surrounding area. Cleary was tasked with preparing a list of possible conditions to incorporate into site approval.
To view the public hearings, go to whoh-tv.org. To see documents and videos pertaining to Electric Owl Studios, visit https://www.hohny.gov/478/Development-Graham-Windham-Property-Elec.
The next Planning Board meeting is scheduled for Thursday, Sept.19. The agenda has not yet been released.
Please see our recent announcement about the next phase of the Rivertowns Current!