Eieio
August 14th, 2009, 12:57 AM
Heated Talk on Historic Renovations in Sagaponack
By Jennifer Landes
(Aug. 13, 2009) Changes in Sagaponack Village law to clarify the standards its architectural and historic review board uses to evaluate renovations and demolitions on historic properties filled the new Village Hall’s meeting room almost to capacity Monday. Concerned residents were on both sides of the issue.
The measure would add a new section to the law that defines an inappropriate alteration as one that is inconsistent with the United States secretary of the interior’s standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings. The section also defines what an alteration is.
Mayor Donald Louchheim noted that the law “gives the board the authority, if it meets certain criteria, to require the applicant to demonstrate that there is no feasible alternative to demolition” or that preserving the buildings would prevent “a reasonable economic return on the property.”
The board would look at both demolitions and alterations to see if they would present “visual offensiveness,” either from being too similar or too dissimilar to their surroundings.
“There is a misunderstanding of the powers” of the board and what it is or is not, Mr. Louchheim said, adding that it is not a court of last resort. “They are the first line of defense and their role is very specific. If they don’t approve an application, it does not necessarily mean that it’s not built.”
Applicants have the right to appeal to the zoning board of appeals. “If they weigh that the assertion of public interest is infringing upon the basic rights of the property owner, if it is onerous or holding them to a higher standard, then they can order that a variance be approved,” Mr. Louchheim said.
Peter Smith, an owner of a property considered historic in the village, said he was concerned about the new language. “I appreciate what you say about the process, but the process has its own momentum. . . . If an alteration request is denied, there is an appeal, but the momentum is against the homeowner.” He said he was also concerned about the federal government guidelines, which he said had a list of 200 to 300 alterations not recommended for historic buildings.
“I live at 850 Sagg Main Street in a house cobbled together over the centuries. It worked in 1800, but not today.” Mr. Smith said he has one bathroom for three bedrooms and has to walk through the bath to reach the other rooms. “I can’t add an addition on to my house in the literal reading of this law.”
Mr. Louchheim said Mr. Smith’s reading of the law was too literal. “There are all sorts of guidelines for what you can do with solar panels, heating, and interior renovation.” When the guidelines say “not recommended, it is just that, not recommended,” he said. “It’s not a mandate.”
Mr. Smith said he thought something else was afoot. “What are we really up to? Are we prohibiting demolition? By making demolition difficult are we trying to encourage landowners to preserve buildings in a soft manner?”
“We are trying to prevent willy-nilly destruction of buildings that define the community,” Mr. Louchheim replied.
You Can Forget Dinner
Sagaponack being Sagaponack, officials and those residents present were all well familiar with one another. Lee Foster, a village board member and the deputy mayor, was busy soliciting signatures so she could run for the board of the Hampton Library in Bridgehampton. Mr. Louchheim inadvertently lost future dinner invitations from Linda Francke when he noted that her house, which was built in the 1980s, was not “a candidate for priority preservation.”
Tinka Topping invited Mr. Smith to use her bathroom if he was having difficulty in his own house, which she said she believed was a big enough building to find “ways to make it work.”
“You can’t have everything,” she said. “You live here and live in harmony with the surroundings.”
Barbara Albright said she was concerned about “all these little houses you want to preserve. There are all teachers, firemen, E.M.T.s living there . . . you need the little houses.”
Mr. Louchheim conceded indirectly that a historic house with restrictions could affect property values. “Many people do take pride in having a home that’s historic,” he said. “Some are put off, some not. Someone wanting a teardown would be put off.” He stated, however, that the measure would not lead to buildings being landmarked.
Patrick Guarino said that when Southampton Town chose not to enact a law landmarking buildings and kept the preservation of historic properties almost entirely up to homeowners, it led to a situation where “it is already losing its unique character, which Sagaponack still has.”
“It depends on what you are doing,” Mr. Louchheim said. Decisions would be based on the question, “what is it about the house that makes it architecturally or historically important? If you can’t see it and it’s not impacting on the character of the building, you can do pretty much what you want.”
Lisa Duryea-Thayer, a village board member who previously served on the architectural and historic review board, said that in her experience on that board and as a liaison to it, “I never cease to be amazed by how cooperative they are and how they’ve been able to work through very unique situations.”
She added that “it doesn’t mean that every situation in the future will be perfect, but so far everyone has gone away happy.”
By Jennifer Landes
(Aug. 13, 2009) Changes in Sagaponack Village law to clarify the standards its architectural and historic review board uses to evaluate renovations and demolitions on historic properties filled the new Village Hall’s meeting room almost to capacity Monday. Concerned residents were on both sides of the issue.
The measure would add a new section to the law that defines an inappropriate alteration as one that is inconsistent with the United States secretary of the interior’s standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings. The section also defines what an alteration is.
Mayor Donald Louchheim noted that the law “gives the board the authority, if it meets certain criteria, to require the applicant to demonstrate that there is no feasible alternative to demolition” or that preserving the buildings would prevent “a reasonable economic return on the property.”
The board would look at both demolitions and alterations to see if they would present “visual offensiveness,” either from being too similar or too dissimilar to their surroundings.
“There is a misunderstanding of the powers” of the board and what it is or is not, Mr. Louchheim said, adding that it is not a court of last resort. “They are the first line of defense and their role is very specific. If they don’t approve an application, it does not necessarily mean that it’s not built.”
Applicants have the right to appeal to the zoning board of appeals. “If they weigh that the assertion of public interest is infringing upon the basic rights of the property owner, if it is onerous or holding them to a higher standard, then they can order that a variance be approved,” Mr. Louchheim said.
Peter Smith, an owner of a property considered historic in the village, said he was concerned about the new language. “I appreciate what you say about the process, but the process has its own momentum. . . . If an alteration request is denied, there is an appeal, but the momentum is against the homeowner.” He said he was also concerned about the federal government guidelines, which he said had a list of 200 to 300 alterations not recommended for historic buildings.
“I live at 850 Sagg Main Street in a house cobbled together over the centuries. It worked in 1800, but not today.” Mr. Smith said he has one bathroom for three bedrooms and has to walk through the bath to reach the other rooms. “I can’t add an addition on to my house in the literal reading of this law.”
Mr. Louchheim said Mr. Smith’s reading of the law was too literal. “There are all sorts of guidelines for what you can do with solar panels, heating, and interior renovation.” When the guidelines say “not recommended, it is just that, not recommended,” he said. “It’s not a mandate.”
Mr. Smith said he thought something else was afoot. “What are we really up to? Are we prohibiting demolition? By making demolition difficult are we trying to encourage landowners to preserve buildings in a soft manner?”
“We are trying to prevent willy-nilly destruction of buildings that define the community,” Mr. Louchheim replied.
You Can Forget Dinner
Sagaponack being Sagaponack, officials and those residents present were all well familiar with one another. Lee Foster, a village board member and the deputy mayor, was busy soliciting signatures so she could run for the board of the Hampton Library in Bridgehampton. Mr. Louchheim inadvertently lost future dinner invitations from Linda Francke when he noted that her house, which was built in the 1980s, was not “a candidate for priority preservation.”
Tinka Topping invited Mr. Smith to use her bathroom if he was having difficulty in his own house, which she said she believed was a big enough building to find “ways to make it work.”
“You can’t have everything,” she said. “You live here and live in harmony with the surroundings.”
Barbara Albright said she was concerned about “all these little houses you want to preserve. There are all teachers, firemen, E.M.T.s living there . . . you need the little houses.”
Mr. Louchheim conceded indirectly that a historic house with restrictions could affect property values. “Many people do take pride in having a home that’s historic,” he said. “Some are put off, some not. Someone wanting a teardown would be put off.” He stated, however, that the measure would not lead to buildings being landmarked.
Patrick Guarino said that when Southampton Town chose not to enact a law landmarking buildings and kept the preservation of historic properties almost entirely up to homeowners, it led to a situation where “it is already losing its unique character, which Sagaponack still has.”
“It depends on what you are doing,” Mr. Louchheim said. Decisions would be based on the question, “what is it about the house that makes it architecturally or historically important? If you can’t see it and it’s not impacting on the character of the building, you can do pretty much what you want.”
Lisa Duryea-Thayer, a village board member who previously served on the architectural and historic review board, said that in her experience on that board and as a liaison to it, “I never cease to be amazed by how cooperative they are and how they’ve been able to work through very unique situations.”
She added that “it doesn’t mean that every situation in the future will be perfect, but so far everyone has gone away happy.”