The Political Shaping Of Architecture

Can anyone be fool enough to think that intelligent design, planning and development will manifest themselves, given the lack of definition and limitations of the Southampton town and village codes, which lend themselves to political, planning and legal manipulations?Is it no wonder that the most acrimonious public debates still revolve around projects springing forth from planned development district (PDD) and historic preservation and architectural review board applications?

The performance and determinations of both the Sag Harbor and Southampton village boards of historic preservation and architectural review call into question their ability to adhere to and interpret their own bylaws, design handbooks, and the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines when rendering decisions on certificates of appropriateness for historic district properties or proposed demolitions.

The members of these boards, as well as those of planning and zoning boards, are political appointees. Some have backgrounds in architecture, engineering, design, landscape design, archeology, real estate and planning—but many do not.

These are volunteer positions requiring dedication and commitment, with few if any stipends. The public does not elect these individuals, and they are not required to demonstrate competence in the reading of building or site plans. It is, however, these very individuals, along with town board members, who control both the aesthetics and the fate of the built environment.

At a New Year’s Day party in Sag Harbor, a guest, architect Randy Croxton, spoke to the Sag Harborites and called 2014 a year of horrendous loss for the community, with vast quantities of the village’s historic fabric going into Dumpsters. On January 1, this writer tallied at least 10 new houses under construction in the village, along with even more over-scaled renovations and ill-conceived additions. The group Save Sag Harbor, with 1,750 members, is now watchdogging the ARB and zoning boards and encouraging more citizen participation and discussion with regard to proposed projects at these board meetings.

No one wants to see Sag Harbor’s Historic National Register District embalmed, but there is great cause for concern given the number of new projects that deviate wildly in terms of scale, massing, context and choice of materials (and good design sense), while ignoring the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines for preservation projects. All of these projects have come to fruition with ARB and zoning board approvals, and the results are simply out of control.

In Southampton Village, the Pyrrhus Concer house, significant for the person who lived there as well as to the history of the African-American community, and deemed worthy of preservation by the ARB, met the wrecker’s ball after its new owners threatened the village with a $10 million lawsuit. They recently decided to abandon their plans for the site, purportedly having lost interest in the project.

The ARB, also confronted with new height regulations mandated by the base floodplain elevation maps of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, had to contend with 50-foot-high houses along the oceanfront in the historic districts along Gin and Meadow lanes. The village height limit is 35 feet, but with an additional 15 feet (plus or minus) required by FEMA, many thought that this situation would prove calamitous for the integrity of these districts. While it’s not impossible to design to these restrictions, invoking a moratorium on new construction until Southampton Village can grapple with a reexamination of waterfront height requirements seems to be a prudent measure that has been taken at this juncture.

The 2014 PDD minefield continued with the unfortunate approval of the architecturally uninspired Sandy Hollow affordable housing project in Tuckahoe, which called its barracks-like apartment building the “manor” house. This project—going against the smart growth principles recommended in the soon-to-be-out-of-date 1999 Comprehensive Master Plan, which mandated that projects such as this be located near hamlet centers—has now set a terrible precedent for more of the same to follow.

Regarding older projects in the works, developer Robert Morrow, despite having his PDD application for the Tuckahoe Main Street shopping center denied two years ago, has now resurfaced with essentially the same plan. This time he’s asking for a zoning change of use from highway business to shopping center business to accommodate a 40,000-square-foot King Kullen supermarket, along with a 15,000-square-foot strip mall and an 8,500-square-foot bank.

All of the problems that existed before still exist today. The local community claims that it neither needs nor wants a shopping mall at this site. It will result in more vehicular congestion on the most heavily trafficked artery in the township, extra traffic and trucks rumbling down residential side streets, village businesses potentially squeezed out with a ghost village left behind, and a solecistic architectural solution more in keeping with Jericho Turnpike than the existing highway business zone.

This proposal will need approval from the town, and Mr. Morrow will have to prove that he cannot achieve a reasonable return for the property under current zoning. He’ll also have to demonstrate that his alleged hardship, not applicable to the rest of the zoning district, is unique, and that his project will not alter the existing character of the neighborhood (trickling down to the village). Most importantly, it will be an uphill battle to convince anyone that his so-called hardship has not been self-created.

The saga of the Canoe Place Inn PDD, after 10 years, is finally coming to a head. When Gregg and Mitchell Rechler of R-Squared Development purchased the CPI in 2004, they planned to demolish the buildings on the site and build a world-class resort the scale of which had never been seen before in Southampton Town. When the community and local civic organizations protested the demise of their storied but deteriorating historic inn, which dates back to the American Revolution and, in its heyday, was one of the swankiest resort hotels in the country, they eventually reconsidered their position with the help of some intervention on the part of Town Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst. Instead of demolishing the structure, which is not landmarked, they’ve proposed to restore it to its former glory.

The trade-off here is a PDD application that originally sought a 40-unit townhouse project on two properties on the east side of the Shinnecock Canal and time-shares on the CPI property. As of right, the CPI site alone would yield 33 motel units based on the existing inn and five cottages, and the east side of the canal would be entitled to another 25, for a total of 58 units. The town nibbled the number of units down to 37 condos, leaving R-Squared with a gain of 12 units beyond as-of-right. Additionally, they are including a decentralized, state-of-the-art wastewater disposal system manufactured by Nitrex, which performs well under the state standard of 10 milligrams of nitrogen per liter of wastewater discharge. This sewage treatment system also would be allowed, but not mandated, as of right under current zoning.

What is particularly perplexing is the Hatfield-McCoy battle going on between the parties on the east and west sides of the canal. The east-siders, many of whom live on the hill above the proposed townhouses, have been involved only recently. The notion that they could object to a wastewater system, systematically maintained, that represents the future of waste disposal in Southampton Town defies imagination. Accusing the west-siders of waging a nostalgia war and selling their souls to reclaim the one piece of Hampton Bays by which their lives and sense of place have been defined is equally preposterous.

The Planning Board also has objected to the townhouses by invoking the Comprehensive Master Plan and stating that the area should be for recreation and shops, and that density of this nature is not appropriate on this waterfront.

Let’s face it: The Shinnecock Canal is never going to rival the Grand Canal in Venice (and that’s truly dense). It does, however, have its own storied history that no one has taken into the overall equation.

The canal, which opened in 1892, connects Great Peconic Bay and the North Fork to Shinnecock Bay and beyond to the Atlantic Ocean. In 1919, the locks system was constructed to relieve the height differential between the bays, with Peconic being 3 feet higher than Shinnecock, as well as addressing salinity levels to increase the shellfish population. A civil engineering marvel at the time of construction, it remains today the only water navigation locks in operation on Long Island. The canal is an attraction in its own right, to be viewed from the walkway proposed by R-Squared.

Yes, compromises have to be made, but the community will benefit from this project. It may well be the most ambitious rescue/renovation in Southampton’s history. Added tax revenue from the project also will help the community as well as creating permanent jobs.

The concept of the PDD challenges what should be the inviolate nature of zoning. Each PDD application has involved nightmare scenarios later fleshed out during the hearing process. What it really does reveal is the fact that community benefits and mitigation still lack the criteria for definition. Additionally, given the technical levels of complexity involved in so many projects under review, advisory boards need to be composed of individuals who are trained professionals—selected on merit rather than by political patronage.

Until then, politics will continue to shape our architecture and the future of the built environment.