1 Photo
[caption id="attachment_49655" align="alignnone" width="800"]
The houses at 314 and 296 Main Street in Sag Harbor. Michael Heller photo[/caption]
By Douglas Feiden
Uprooting a house and moving it from one location to another is a grand Sag Harbor tradition dating back to at least the early 19th century and involving distances that could be short as a few yards or as long as a dozen miles.
One such “traveling property” was 314 Main Street, the two-and-a-half story, three-bay, Federal-style frame residence with a stone foundation and gabled roof that has sat across from Otter Pond on Upper Sag Harbor Cove since it was relocated 196 years ago.
Now, there are preliminary plans for the old house to be moved again, according to owner and longtime resident Paris Fields, who unveiled them on Thursday night at the meeting of the Board of Historic Preservation and Architectural Review.
“This house was moved on logs by oxen, and it’s really incredible,” said Mr. Fields, who described to the ARB how it had been hauled several miles northward, to Sag Harbor from Bridgehampton, in 1820.
This time, if Mr. Fields and his partner Clifton Murdock get their way, the house would traverse a much shorter distance: 17 feet to the south to be precise, from one part of the property to another. Mr. Fields cited “privacy and legacy” as two reasons for the move.
An expansion project on his northerly neighbor’s home brought their two Main Street houses much too close, he said. “It now has eight windows on the side of the house, and an extension that faces right into my house, and we walk around basically with the blinds down,” he said.
Noting that he’s a preservationist and antiquarian who has done work for the Smithsonian, Mr. Fields said he owns three separate but adjoining lots and has a strong interest that they be kept together always and not subdivided by future owners.
“My concern is legacy and the future,” he said. “Meaning when we’re not here anymore, my fear is that the property could be divided into three separate lots. I’ve seen that happen elsewhere, and what’s essential to me is that that sort of thing never happens here, either in our lifetime or afterward.”
Repositioning the house to another location on the property, farther away from one of the lot lines, would make a subdivision less likely. It would also maintain the west-facing sightlines across the Upper Cove that have been cherished by Sag Harbor residents for generations.
“My grandmother would look out the second-floor windows and count the people looking at the sunset,” Mr. Fields said. “I don’t want to take away what we’ve given the village, which is a view of the water and the sunset.”
In the 1800s, when “houses were not anchored to foundations as they are today,” a home relocation would traditionally take place in winter, when the ground was hardened, according to research by the Sag Harbor Historical Society. It would be a horse-drawn affair in which the house was moved on skids and along rollers.
A contemporary move involves constructing a new foundation, jacking up the house on steel beams and literally sliding it over to its new moorings. “It’s a very simple process,” Mr. Fields said.
The discussion of prospective plans for the Main Street dwelling marked the second time in less than a month that the ARB was asked to consider a house-hauling project in the village’s historic district.
Pop singer Billy Joel, who owns a late 18th century waterfront home at 20 Bay Street, dispatched his builder and architectural consultant to the board in late February to sketch out a plan that would literally hoist the two-story frame house off its foundation, build a new foundation under it, then turn it around and realign it so it would more directly face the water.
ARB members earlier this month toured Mr. Joel’s two-building compound to get an up-close look at the structures and their positioning and configuration. Part of the board’s mandate is to preserve streetscapes, and lifting, pivoting, moving and squaring off the main house to create an unbroken façade along the shore could alter the streetscape.
The ARB won’t take further action until Mr. Joel submits a formal application. Similarly, Mr. Fields is only at the discussion stage in his proposal to the board. He didn’t respond to messages asking for additional comment.
But at the board meeting, he spoke passionately about his family’s ties to 314 Main Street. “I want to look out the same windows people have looked out for hundreds of years,” he said. “We have the original windows from 1830, and more important to me was that my mother would open those windows.”
And Mr. Fields added, “This is my home, this is where my family is buried, this is where I’ll be buried, this is where we’ll be buried. I am not just someone who’s passing through.”
The ARB signaled its initial reaction was favorable. “When you come before us with a formal application, I don’t know if there’s going to be a problem, but I don’t see one off the top of my head,” said Anthony Brandt, the board’s chairman.
“I’m on board,” added ARB member Dean Gomolka.
Meanwhile, the owner of 52 Garden Street, a one-and-a-half story frame cottage in the historic district dating to 1840, got a much tougher reception from the ARB when it was presented with proposed renovations.
Among the changes, the 1,065-square-foot home would be expanded to a still-modestly sized 1,300 square feet by raising the roof, from 19 feet to 24.6 feet, to create a full second floor.
Architect Kathryn Fee said that would make the upper level a more habitable space for her client, Sara Colleton, who is nearly 6-feet tall and is often at risk of hitting her head on the ceiling of a master bedroom whose headroom is under 7 feet.
The ARB was unimpressed. “This is a small historic house, and transforming it into a two-story dwelling is just going to erase its charm and then its historic character disappears,” said Mr. Brandt.
Ms. Fee observed, “It is very difficult to figure out how to get a second floor.”
gavinmenu on Mar 31, 2016