| Issue #27, September 29, 2006 |
ANY BODY WANNA JOB ON A TOWN BOARD?
By Renée Donlon
The Building Department of Southampton Village issues about 25 building permits a month. Yet, according to Permit Examiner Tien Ho So, only one or two are for new, single family dwellings. In fact, only ten of those permits were issued between March and August of this year. In a village in which, according to Mayor Mark Epley, ninety-eight percent of the area is “built out,” the trend is to tear down or add on to pre-existing houses from the 1950s and 60s to create bigger, newer ones. Bigger and newer are two adjectives that attract the attention of the Board of Architectural Review and Historic Preservation. The Board is responsible for approving new building projects, including additions and changes to existing buildings, and for preserving historic structures.
Approving new buildings while protecting old ones is tricky in a place like the Hamptons where dream mansions spring up around historic cottages. The pressure of balancing these two responsibilities, on top of high blood pressure, led the Board’s chairman, Roger Blaugh, to resign.
Blaugh says that pressure can come from both the applicant and the applicant’s neighbors. Whether a couple spending their life savings on a kid’s room addition or a developer investing millions of dollars to turn an old shack into a mansion, Blaugh recognizes that the applicant “feels the financial pressure.” The applicant is eager to have his project approved, without the Board requiring him to make modifications that could result is added costs in architect fees or blueprints. “There are moments when [applicants] get quite anxious,” said Blaugh.
But they are not the only ones. The Board often experiences addition pressure from the applicant’s neighbors. If an applicant proposes to build an addition on his small house, the people living in all the other small houses on the street will often protest, sometimes bringing with them lawyers or political groups.
Blaugh found himself both professionally and personally torn between the two sides. It was his, and the Board’s, responsibility to determine whether a new house or addition would fit in with the architectural landscape of the area. However, the Board must follow the law, allowing an applicant to build if all requirements are met.
Blaugh’s sympathies also conflicted on a personal level. Having worked on several preservation projects and having founded the Southampton Village Neighborhood Association Group, Blaugh understands the need to protect the historic look of the area. On the other hand, Blaugh became a real estate agent for the Corcoran Group in January. While Blaugh devoted more time to the Board than to his real estate job, serving on the Board forced him to “set aside his sense of business and business development,” necessary tools in the real estate field.
This question of conflict of interest worries some people. After all, nearly anyone can become a board member. Current members include an interior designer, a vicar’s wife, a mortgage broker, and a private resident. To replace Blaugh, Mayor Epley may appoint a new chair from among existing ARB members, other village boards, or the public. Though one could argue that appointing someone from, say, the Building Department would skew the Board in favor of development over preservation, Mayor Epley says he is looking for “an independent thinker” who is “not affiliated with any political party” and who “wants to serve the community.” However, experience with reading plans or with the building trades in general is a plus. This causes concern that builders and developers could gain an edge based on the favoring of these skills.
New changes in the zoning laws may help remove the possible conflict of interest concerns. The new code equates size of lot to size of house. Bigger homes can be built on bigger lots. Smaller lots will have to stick to small structures. Decisions about size were previously made by the Board based on a determination of whether the proposed structure would match the streetscape. The new zoning code is designed to avoid subjectivity.
Yet more changes need to be made concerning the Board’s other charge: preservation. The register of historic homes has not been updated in over a decade. Although 500 houses are currently on the list, the Board believes there are more.
Being on the list is the easy part. Actually preserving the house can be done four ways. It can be retained and restored on site. It can be moved within the site or to another one. The fourth option is Deconstruction for Preservation in which everything with historic reference in the house is tagged and saved and in which the house is drawn by an architect so that it can be rebuilt elsewhere. Yet, such an extensive project carries an extensive price tag. Using this option for the 441 Little Plains house will cost between $600,000 and $1 million. While that project is lucky enough to be funded by architect Robert Strada, there is no funding built into the village budget for preservation. This is a problem close to Blaugh’s heart. He uses a tooth analogy to describe the tragedy of not protecting historic homes; once a tooth is pulled, you never get it back. A fake one just doesn’t feel the same. The look of your mouth is never the same. Likewise, once an historic house is destroyed, you’ve lost that piece of history forever. A replica doesn’t bring back the original timbers, windows, beams, etc. The look of the village is never the same.
 |
