.

Village Review Board Denies CVS Sign, Considers Historic District Applications

A recap of Monday's Southampton Village ARB meeting and Spanburgh's take on some of the applications.

I have been attending the meetings of the Southampton Village Board of Historical Preservation and Architectural Review (ARB) since January of 2009 and posting about it on my blog Southampton Village Review. From now on though, I am doing it for Southampton Patch in my new column "." Stay tuned, as I will be posting about new applications to be heard at the next public hearing soon.

(By the way, the videos of each public hearing are posted pretty soon afterward on the village website if you ever care to see for yourself.)

At Monday's meeting the chairperson, Curtis Highsmith, and board member Sheila Haley were absent in addition to Zachary Studenroth, the board's architectural history consultant. All other board members and legal counsel were present.

will occur on Jan. 10, 2011, at 7 p.m., at . One of the biggest reason I go to these meetings and post about them is to get the public more involved with aesthetic/historic/preservation issues where they live. "Democracy is for those who show up," after all.

Signs:

1. , 111 Main St: The applicant wanted to double the size of the sign and change the letters to red. Denied.

2. , 2 Jobs Ln: The applicants wish to apply their logo above the door, on the stucco. No one is present to represent the application and the board has questions. Adjourned.

Applications Within an Historic District:

1. African American Museum of the East End, 245 N Sea Rd: landmark designation. Approved. (To catch up on the history of this application, and others where more description is not provided, you'll have to refer to my blog: Southampton Village Review.)

2. Peter Talty, 37 Post Crossing: demolish and rebuild existing barn.  Approved.

3. Susan S. Wilson, 184 Main St: small addition to second floor. Approved.

4. CV & V LLC (Vittorio Assaf), 63 Linden Ln: add 1,063sf to an existing [1940s] home along with a new foundation. The architect is Nick Vero. The application was presented Monday by attorney Wayne Bruyn. The house will essentially be entirely re-clad with new siding, roofing, windows, trim, and be raised up to be put on a new foundation and to raise the level of the first floor due to FEMA issues. The trim will no longer be red, but white. There will be a stone clad retaining wall in front because of the required raised septic system. The chimney will remain existing as will the side entry. There will be a new round window over the side entry. The board previously hoped the owner would reconsider removing the shutters but the owner has not. The neighbor across the street (whose house dates back to 1806) would like the proposed renovations to have more charm. There are no issues with the proposed master bedroom balcony, which will face the pond (). The application is adjourned so that the other board members and historic consultant can weigh in.

5. CNL II, LLC, 58 Coopers Neck Ln: 240-square-foot one-story addition. This property is to the north of the historic "Clyden" estate and is a relatively new house. The architect presents the application. The purpose of the addition is to enlarge the kitchen and provide a few more bathrooms. The board has no issues. Approved for written decision.

6. Elizabeth Economy, 6 Ox Pasture Rd: 1,867sf two-story addition; relocate garage. Historic Charles White estate. One of the board members, Brian Brady, is the architect for this client, which means he must recuse himself. Consequently there isn't quorum to consider the application. Adjourned.

7. J. Christopher Burch, 232 First Neck Ln: demolish existing pool house; build new 769-square-foot pool house. Lisa Zaloga, an architect, presents the application for the designer, Form Designs. The board has no issues. Adjourned for written decision.

Applications outside of an Historic District:

1. 135 Wickapogue Rd Assoc. LLC: build a 4,244-square-foot two-story house with 1,026 square feet of porches and a 720-square-foot accessory garage on a vacant lot.  The owner, H.B. Gianos, presents the application. He also owns the property being developed to the south. There are many old farmhouses on the street as well as a sprinkling of newer homes. A photo of the drawing of the proposed house is in the . The house will have clapboard siding, white-washed chimneys, zinc-coated copper porch roofing and blue paneled shutters. The entire site will be "hedged-in." All of the board's issues from the last meeting have been resolved via new drawings submitted before tonight's meeting. When public comment is invited an adjacent neighbor, Doranne Flynn, speaks. She spoke at the last meeting also. She does not have issues with the aesthetics of the house but feels it is too large for its lot (i.e. inappropriate with the street). It will be plus or minus 4,200 square feet on a half acre (plus the garage, and perhaps a pool). She has also been told by the and Studenroth that the property is within an historic district but the village zoning map does not support that idea. Additionally, Doranne surveyed the neighborhood and submitted a chart with other properties, their acreage and their house sizes, to demonstrate that the proposed house is significantly larger than most existing houses. She also researched the history of the property. This and the two properties to the west were once one property owned by the Lillywhite family. In 1956, Minnie Lillywhite willed the property to her three children, which consequently was divided into three parcels. Doranne said she uncovered a court case which prohibited the building of a ranch style house on one of the lots because only one house could be built on all three lots. Unfortunately, all of Doranne's concerns were not deeply considered by the board members and the application was approved. I felt bad for this woman. She had gathered a significant amount of relevant information only to be brushed-off. It's my opinion, that ever since the infamous Ferrara case, this board will no longer enter into issues of appropriateness when it doesn't pertain to aesthetics. I would have asked for a streetscape, to see the proposed design in context with the rest of the street.

2. Donald & Melinda Quintin, 37 Leo's Ln: 144-square-foot one-story addition, driveway gates, convert garage to pool house. Michael Behringer, the architect, presents the application. The board has no issues. Approved.

3. David Koch, 880 Meadow Ln: modify and enlarge existing dormers, build 175-square-foot accessory shed. A representative from the architect's office presents the application. The purpose is to enlarge three bedrooms and one bathroom and add two additional bathrooms. The board has no issues. All materials will match existing. Approved.

4. Taylors Creek Corp, 733 Halsey Neck Ln: two, two-story additions totaling 3,711 square feet. This house is at the bottom (south) west side of Halsey Neck Lane. The house has had recent additions/modifications and is now proposing further work. I didn't catch who the person representing the applicant was, but the board had no issues with the work. Most of the work will face Halsey Neck Lane and volumize and extend the garage elevation. It's already a large house. Approved.

5. Douglas & Patricia Valk, 80 Wooley St: demolish existing house; build a 2,876-square-feet two-story house, 484-square-feet garage, 175-square-feet pool house and 490-square-foot accessory structure. This will be a dramatic transformation of a very modestly developed property, but it won't be as severe as what happened on Osborne Street. The existing house and garage are set back from the road. The proposed drawings of the front elevation, studio and pool house are in the . I personally feel that all the various structures are of differing styles: the house is the most traditional, but still in dire need of detail; the garage has a strange round window in its gable; the "studio" is a reincarnation of the existing house but now has a wide array of window types (triangular, awning, and those with divided lights), and the pool house seems from the 1970s: it has a flat roof and is semi-circular in plan. The board has concerns but doesn't go into specifics. They all express a desire to visit the site. Adjourned.

6. Jeff Farnuth, 96 Edwards Ln: miscellaneous exterior alterations. Again, one of the board members, Brian Brady, is the architect for this client, which means he must recuse himself. Consequently there isn't quorum to consider the application. Adjourned.

7. Terri Nelson, 36 Corrigan St: 130-square-foot one-story addition. The purpose of the addition is to enlarge the kitchen. The house has also been resided and re-trimmed in the meantime. The board has no issues. Approved.

8. 45 Meadowmere, LLC: miscellaneous exterior alterations and 194-square-foot addition. The new mud room entry will match an existing entry and the garage will be converted to a playroom. Fred Smith, architect, presents the application. All work will match the existing architecture – even including "clinker" bricks. This is the historic carriage house to the Grosvenor Atterbury estate but no one seems to notice that, or at least acknowledge it. It also seems to me that this specific property is in the historic district. Oh well. The board has no issues with the proposal. Approved.

9. Ronald Diamond, 98 Pheasant Close East 116-square-foot first-story addition and 1,291-square-foot second-story addition. The architect presents the application. All materials and details will match the existing house except that the roof overhangs will be more colonial in style. The board has no issues. Approved.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something