MONTHLY MEETING. 1. Animal Rescue Fund 17 Montauk Highway Applicant proposes demolition of a cottage

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF SAGAPONACK IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK AND STATE OF NEW YORK A regular monthly meeting of the Architectural and Historic Review Board of the Village of Sagaponack was held at 3:30 p.m. on Friday, November 19, 2010 at 3175 Montauk Highway, Sagaponack, N.Y. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Sandford with a flag salute. Present were Board Members Vice Chairperson Tom White, Barbara Slifka, and alternate Board Member Sean Selfe. Also present was Pat Arancio-Remkus, secretary and Village Building Inspector John Woudsma. Absent were Clay Dilworth, Gideon Mendelson and Village Attorney Anthony Tohill. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MONTHLY MEETING A motion to approve the minutes from the October 18, 2010 AHRB meeting was offered by Tom White and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. II. OLD BUSINESS a. Demolitions 1. Animal Rescue Fund 17 Montauk Highway Applicant proposes demolition of a cottage Barbara Slifka recused herself from this application. Sara Davison, Executive Director, presented the application. Chairperson Sandford stated that we have discussed this application more than once. With the new code, we can proceed without five members, but will need a majority of three members to approve this application. 1

2 Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the demolition of a cottage. Tom White offered the motion and Sean Selfe seconded it. It was unanimously approved. 2. Gloria Strong 591 Parsonage Lane Applicant proposes demolition of a 2 story frame dwelling with a 1 story addition, a framed barn and a shed Chairperson Sandford stated that at the last meeting the AHRB approved the demolition of the framed barn and shed. We are specifically discussing the demolition of the two story frame dwelling. At the last month s meeting the Board asked the applicant to preserve the cottage rather than demolishing it and so now Mr. Woodward is now presenting the plan to the Board incorporating the cottage into the plan. John Bennett, Esq. and Eric Woodward, architect, authorized agents for the applicant and representative for the purchaser, presented the application Eric Woodward stated that at the last meeting the AHRB asked to see a proposal that would not involve the demolition of the cottage. He stated that the purchaser preferred not to use the cottage and he was under the impression when he started this procedure that the cottage would not be considered significant, but it took some adjusting. He stated what they will need is support for the following rather than a demolition and it is to use the cottage as part of the house and connect it with an underground tunnel. He stated that the cottage will remain in its existing location and there will be no change to the street view. He also stated they will be saving the large tree. He explained that in order for this to work they have moved the placement of the new house back substantially to make room for the cottage. He stated they also propose to remove 7 off of the rear of the cottage. This will still leave the cottage with the characteristic of the 1 st fl being bigger than the 2 nd fl. The other reason that we consent to do that is partly to conform as the kitchen is in the portion of the house that will be eliminated. Mr. Woodward explained that due to the proposed change in Village Code that would allow 100% of the un-built square footage to be used for accessory structures, we can now design the property as we originally planned, which would result in the total FAR being over by 80 s. f. He noted that he will revise the plan to reduce the square footage by 80 s. f. assuming that the local law passes. We would like the AHRB to support an application to the ZBA for a variance of that amount if that law does not pass. In other words it is 680 s. f. which is the amount that if the 30% code does not change we are 680 s. f. short on the GFA. We are concerned that we will go through the process today where we are saying that we will not go through with the demolition and in the next month and a half the 30% law doesn t get changed and we are stuck before the ZBA we hope that you 2

3 will be supportive in saying that this is an important little cottage that you would not want torn down and that you would like the ZBA to grant the variance. It will not be necessary if the law changes, but we do not want to get stuck in the middle. This is our third month being before you and we want to get the house built within a certain period of time and we do not want to stumble later. He also stated that the 2 nd code consideration is an accessory structure, which this cottage would become if it stayed where it is and were attached to the house it can not be more than 20 high and can not have bedrooms. We were told by the Building Inspector that an underground link unites the two buildings for the purposes of considering that it is one structure and the underground link would legalize it as all primary residence and we would not have to get variances for the height and the use of bedrooms in the building. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that as long as it is a habitable connection from the new primary dwelling to a habitable basement to which Mr. Woodward responded that it is not just a crawl space to go to but you can walk from one to the other into finished space. Mr. Woodward stated that we know today that we are told that works in Sagaponack. We also hope that you can go on record as supporting an application for a variance for those two things if in fact somebody down the line says they do not like the fact that you are connecting this underground and we think you need to have a variance. It is the same either way visually. From a design standpoint we took the back apart. I did not believe this building should be attached as part of the bigger house. What we decided last time is that what is special about this cottage is that it is right next to the road as a little cottage although another approach would have been to move it back and make it part of a big house. We did not want that and you did not want that either. We are trying to cover our bases and say that we would like you to be on record that you will support us with the underground link approach and variance if that turns out to be necessary. Chairperson Sandford asked what would be done to the exterior to which Mr. Woodward responded that they would remove 7 off of the back, otherwise it will be the same. Mr. Woodward stated that he will still have to come before the AHRB for review of the new house. He told his client that he will go along with this approach as long as he is aware that he may want the main house to look a little different. He stated that he may modify the tower so it will relate better. He does not want to make it a duplicate, but you are correct in thinking that we may not want to make it the same as the cottage in order to honor it. Chairperson Sandford asked if the cottage will remain white to which Mr. Woodward responded that it is partially white and partially not. He stated the shingles on the side will be natural, but if that was important that would be acceptable. He stated that presuming that since we are not changing the location 3

4 and we are not asking for demolition of it we do not have to get into any complicated covenants about how we treat the structure. Tom White stated he would like the cottage to remain visible from the road as it is now to which Mr. Woodward responded that it will remain visible. Tom White asked if there was any intent to camouflage to which Mr. Woodward responded no. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that they would still need a variance for the 80 s. f. to which Mr. Woodward responded that he will modify the plan so a variance would not be needed. Chairperson Sandford asked if they would need a variance for the underground tunnel to which Village Building Inspector John Woudsma responded no, only if it is taken out of our code. John Bennett stated that Southampton Town has prohibitions against underground tunnels and Sagaponack does not. Sean Selfe, Barbara Slifka and Tom White stated that they would support the variance in order to preserve the cottage. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to support a variance of 30% of the unbuilt FAR, if necessary, for the square footage. The motion was offered by Tom White and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. III. NEW BUSINESS a. Demolitions 1. Daniel Millwood LLC 553 Daniels Lane Applicant proposes demolition of a two story framed dwelling and pool David McGullam, architect represented the applicant. He stated that there is an existing 2-story house that they wish to demolish and build new. He stated that the interior of the existing house is not in good shape. He presented elevations of the new home to the AHRB. Barbara Slifka asked when the current house was built to which Mr. McGullam responded that it was built in the 1970 s. Chairperson Sandford stated that the property is 1.8 acres. 4

5 Barbara Slifka noted they will be giving up the garden to which Mr. McGullam responded that that is not a priority for the owners. Tom White asked if Mr. McGullam had any photos of the neighboring properties to which Mr. McGullam responded no. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that there is an aerial view in the file. Chairperson Sandford asked if the property was enclosed to which Mr. McGullam responded yes, there are high hedges. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the demolition of a two story framed dwelling and pool. It was offered by Sean Selfe and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. 2. Pamela Allardice 444 Parsonage Lane Application proposes demolition of a barn and stable Pamela Allardice, owner, stated that she has had her house on the market for three years and there has been no interest in the house, barn and stable. She stated that the stable is 5,000 s. f., which is 1 ½ times the size of the house. She stated that for sales purposes she wants the permits in place. She stated that if someone wants to buy the farm as is, that would be great. She stated that she had put an ad in Dan s Papers for the barn and has received 7 phone calls from people who are interested in purchasing and moving the barn. Chairperson Sandford noted that at past meetings we spoke of movement not destruction of the stable. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that they will not need a permit to move the barn. If they are to dismember the barn, they will need a demolition permit. Ms. Allardice stated that two people came and told her that to take it apart would be very expensive to do. They will have to number everything. She stated that she wants to have a permit in place if someone else wants to remove the barn. Sean Selfe asked if she could switch a C.O. from one of the cottages over to that building. Chairperson Sandford stated that we have to follow the code. She stated that personally she would allow the demo and Barbara Slifka agreed. Sean Selfe noted that the stable was more significant. 5

6 Ms. Allardice stated that people want more land, not a giant building. People do not want it. Chairperson Sandford stated that the house is what is most important. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion for the demolition of a one story potato barn and a horse barn. A motion was offered by Barbara Slifka and seconded by Sean Selfe. It was unanimously approved. B. New Construction Parsonage Lane LLC 515 Parsonage Lane Applicant proposes construction of two story single family dwelling, attached 3 car garage, front covered porch, decks pool, spa and tennis Gene Kinsella, owner, Johns Himmelsback, architect and Andrew Kelly from Araiys Design, landscape architect, presented the application. Mr. Kinsella stated that he had been before the AHRB with the proposal at the last meeting and he took into consideration the Board s comments and has gotten rid of the hedges, made a single entrance out front, removed the cupola and sphere and the diamond shaped windows. He presented the new elevations to the Board. Chairperson Sandford asked what the sphere and lightning rod on the top of the house was replaced with to which Mr. Kinsella responded that they was replaced with a lead coated copper cap. He stated there will be natural shingle and stone. He stated that they have also reduced the amount of stone on the house to soften it up and give it a much softer look. Mr. Kinsella noted that the giant windows on the 2 nd fl are gone. Barbara Slifka asked if there was an entrance from the garage to the house to which Mr. Kinsella responded yes, through a utility room. Barbara Slifka asked what was inside the tower to which Mr. Kinsella responded the stairs. Barbara Slifka asked if there was an orchard to which Mr. Kinsella responded yes. He stated they left all the trees they could and removed the Russian olives. Andrew Kelly presented the lighting plan. He stated there are two wall sconces up front and two wall sconces in the rear of the house. He stated that all of the exterior lighting is within the allowable 500 watts per acre 6

7 Chairperson Sandford asked what the driveway will be to which Mr. Kinsella stated that it will be gravel with cobblestone edging. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of two story single family dwelling, attached 3 car garage, front covered porch, decks pool, spa and tennis. Tom White offered the motion and Barbara Slifka seconded it. It was unanimously approved. 2. Deepak Narula 74 Farm View Drive Applicant proposes construction of a 1 ½ story detached accessory building Nancy Holwell, architect presented the application. She stated that they are proposing a separate play house for ping pong, an office and a studio. The applicants wanted it to look like an old barn that has been renovated with more windows and glass. Ms. Holwell stated that it will have grey cedar siding. She showed the light fixtures they will be using, which will only emit light downward. Tom White asked if it is visible from the street to which Ms. Holwell responded no. It is well hidden by hedges. Ms. Holwell stated that there will be an office for him and a studio for her. She is a painter. There is no basement in the main house so there would be no room for a studio or an office. The studio would be tucked up under the loft on the 2 nd fl. The 1 st fl will have a 7 ½ ceiling height. The basement will have a gym and a large TV. Chairperson Sandford noted that there would not be a kitchenette. Tom White asked where the mechanic room would be to which Mr. Holwell responded that it will be in the basement. Chairperson Sandford asked if they will be building behind the main house to which Ms. Holwell responded yes. Tom White asked if it will be fenced in to which Ms. Holwell responded no, there is a very high hedge. Ms. Holwell stated that they will not be using the same materials on the exterior. They will be using cedar to distinguish the recreation building from the main house. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of a 1 ½ story detached accessory building. Barbara Slifka offered the motion and Sean Selfe seconded it. It was unanimously approved. 7

8 3. Lawrence Donnelly 29 Herb Court Applicant proposes conversion of existing attached two car garage into master bedroom, 1 st Fl addition of a bathroom Sean Leary, project manager presented the application. He stated that there will be very little change to the exterior of the structure and that the footprint will remain the same apart from a small 5 extension. They are proposing to convert the existing two car garage into a master bedroom suite. He stated that they will be using natural cedar siding which will match the existing. He stated that they will be adding French doors and two new windows to the east elevation and that the dormer will extend to meet the other dormer and will allow more space in the 2 nd Fl bathroom. He noted that they already have Health Department approval for adding the bedroom. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the conversion of existing attached two car garage into master bedroom and a 1 st Fl addition of a bathroom. A motion was offered by Tom White and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved Gibson Lane LLC 237 Gibson Lane Applicant proposes two story addition with deck to existing single family structure Val Florio, architect presented the application. He stated that they are proposing an addition to the east side of the structure. Chairperson Sandford noted that the AHRB has previously seen the application as a discussion item. Chairperson Sandford asked if there is an existing deck to which Mr. Florio responded yes. Mr. Florio stated that the house is low and on an angle the length of the property. He is proposing an addition that is on a 30 degree angle and will use cedar shingles and a cedar roof to match what currently exists. Mr. Florio stated that you can not see the addition from the ocean and it can barely be seen from the field. There is a hedge in front. He stated that there is a tower on the front of the house that will face the field. Mr. Florio stated that this house is much smaller than either of the houses to the east or west of this property. He also stated that they will not be adding any new grade and they already have Planning Board approval. 8

9 Barbara Slifka asked if this house will be on pilings to which Mr. Florio stated that it is actually on a foundation and pilings. He stated that the foundation is on top of pilings. If it erodes, it will be held up by the pilings. He stated that the addition is technically in an X Zone, it will be built to flood zone standards, but it is not in a Flood Zone. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of a two story addition with deck to existing single family structure. Sean Selfe offered the motion and it was seconded by Tom White. It was unanimously approved. C. AMENDMENT 1. Myles Partellow 162 Ericas Lane Applicant proposes dormer to east side of garage Myles Partellow, owner presented his application. He stated that he had originally been approved for a dormer that was 4 on one side and 9 on the other side. He is now asking for an amendment to make both sides of the dormer 9 to allow for more usable space. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of a dormer to the east side of garage. Sean Selfe offered the motion and it was seconded by Tom White. It was unanimously approved. III. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Kim Saperstein 741 Daniels Lane Applicant proposes 1 st & 2 nd Fl addition including a master bedroom with a balcony, 1 st Fl addition, enclose existing porch Val Florio, architect, presented the application to the Board. He stated that they are proposing an addition over an existing two car garage with a new one car garage with an office above it and a renovation to the footprint of the existing house. There is an existing octagonal porch off of the kitchen that they would like to take down and expand the kitchen and breakfast room. They have six children and need a bedroom wing apart from the living part of the house and they propose to remove the existing screened porch. Chairperson Sandford stated that you will no longer have this diamond detail to which Mr. Florio stated that it will be incorporated when they go up higher with it. Chairperson Sandford stated she does not like it to which Mr. Florio stated that he will remove it. Mr. Florio stated that there is one in the front of the house, too. 9

10 Barbara Slifka asked if it is for light to which Mr. Florio responded yes. He stated there are very tall hedges and you can not see the house. Sean Selfe stated that he is not a fan of the diamond and Barbara Slifka noted that it serves no function. Chairperson Sandford stated that it is not aesthetically pleasing and if it were cut straight, it would be more fitting with Sagaponack. Barbara Slifka asked when the house was built to which Mr. Florio stated that it was built in the late 1970 s or the early 1980 s. 2. Savas Tsitiridis 183 Daniels Lane Applicant proposes demolition of existing structure and construction of a proposed 2 story single family dwelling with underground garage, pool and pool house Kevin Estrada and Francis D Haene, architects, represented the applicant. Mr. D Haene stated that they are proposing construction of a 6,000 s. f., 2 story modern house with a basement, an underground garage, pool and pool house.. Mr. D Haene stated that the new house will be constructed further back from where the existing house is. He stated that they are proposing two curb cuts one to the underground garage and one to the main entrance. Chairperson Sandford stated she would prefer a single curb cut and asked that they consider that. Barbara Slifka asked if the garage was totally underground to which Mr. D Haene responded yes. Chairperson Sandford asked what is in the basement to which Mr. D Haene stated that it is just the basement which connects to the garage and Mr. Estrada stated there is a laundry room, play room and one bedroom. Barbara Slifka asked if there is any other access to the bedroom in the basement to which Mr. Estrada responded that to the south is the down stairway. Mr. Estrada presented the AHRB with drawings of the new home. He stated there will be grey wood siding. Mr. D Haene stated there will be concrete in the double height space in the middle and there will be wood siding. He stated that it will be two-story with grey siding, and a two story entry space that sits slightly back from the front. He stated that there will be guest bedrooms, a small family area, the dining room, kitchen and access to basement. He stated that the master suite is on the 2 nd Fl. Tom White asked where the parking will be to which Mr. Estrada stated that it will be underground and to the side. 10

11 Chairperson Sandford asked how many bedrooms there will be to which Mr. D Haene stated there will be 5 bedrooms, a master suite plus one bedroom in the basement. There will be a total of seven bedrooms. Chairperson Sandford asked if there will be a chimney to which Mr. Estrada responded yes, but it will not be visible from the street. It is two stories up and set further back. Mr. Estrada stated they would like to landscape the 2 nd Floor roof so that when you look out it will have a view of green. Chairperson Sandford asked if there will be one tone of grey and concrete to which Mr. Estrada responded yes. He stated there will be concrete with glass. Chairperson Sandford asked if the color of the wood will be the same to which Mr. Estrada stated that the siding will all be the same with different vertical accent pieces. It will be open to the elements. Tom White asked if people will get in through the garage to which Mr. D Haene responded yes and also inside the house through the basement. Chairperson Sandford asked why they need a second curb cut. She does not support two curb cuts. Sean Selfe asked why they do not do a turnaround/backup to which Mr. D Haene stated they are working with a landscape architect. Tom White stated that another consideration would be how to get something into the garage when there is snow to which Mr. D Haene responded that they did take that into consideration. Ideally they would like an above ground garage in front, but it does not make sense to move the house further down. Chairperson Sandford noted that it is a narrow lot and it is very challenging to which Mr. D Haene responded yes, it is narrow and oddly shaped. Tom White asked if there will be a pool house to which Mr. D Haene responded yes. He stated there will be a pool house with a shower, toilet and storage for garden furniture. Mr. Estrada noted that there will also be a shower and a BBQ, an open kitchen. Chairperson Sandford noted that they should move the slope to allow for more parking and a grand walkway into the entrance. Mr. Estrada stated they are still looking into all the options, but they wanted to preserve as much of the front yard as possible. Barbara Slifka asked where guests will park to which Mr. Estrada stated that this was the reason for the two curb cuts. He stated that one of the cuts would be for the owners and the other for guests and then come to the main entrance. 11

12 Tom White asked if the idea was to park along the side of the house to which Mr. Estrada responded that there will not be angled parking, just space in the driveway. Tom White noted that the house is boxy to which Mr. Estrada asked if that was good. Mr. White responded that he is not sure yet. Mr. D Haene stated that they will be using the same siding and color as the MacLowe house on Peter s Pond. Chairperson Sandford noted that everything is asymmetrical. Tom White noted that nothing is balanced. IV. MOTION TO ADJOURN MEETING A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Sean Selfe and seconded by Tom White and unanimously approved. Time noted: 5:25 PM PATRICIA ARANCIO-REMKUS Secretary to Board 12