‘The Dominy Pavilion’
“The village appreciates the lengths your client is going to, to preserve this historic structure,” said Frank Newbold, chairman of the East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals, following a hearing Friday on Barry Rosenstein’s application for variances to replace the historic Dominy clock and woodworking shops on his 16-acre property at 60, 62, and 64 Further Lane with what he is calling the “Dominy Pavilion.” The shops, circa 1797 and 1850, would be moved back to their original location, on North Main Street near the Emergency Services Building.
The proposed structure’s footprint would match that of the Dominy shops. It would be 16 feet high, with an ocean-view terrace and an outdoor fireplace, with two rooms and a bathroom on the first floor and an additional 650 square feet of finished space at a basement level. Village code limits such accessory structures to a single 250-square-foot room, no higher than 14 feet.
Just before the hearing, in response to the village’s newly adopted zoning ordinance limiting the size of basements, the applicant cut the size of the basement, originally 1,150 square feet, almost in half, eliminating the need for one variance.
In 1946, the two Dominy structures were in disrepair and about to be demolished when the late Dudley Roberts moved them to 62 Further Lane and combined them into a single structure. Today they are designated timber-frame landmarks, and cannot be torn down.
Mr. Rosenstein, a hedge fund manager and founder of the multibillion-dollar Jana Partners, has razed the main house on the property, and the foundation for a 20,000-square-foot replacement has been dug.
“We’re just replacing the Dominy cottage with another structure,” Leonard Ackerman told the board on behalf of the applicant. “This is essentially a replacement in kind, in the same location,” he said, noting that no neighbors have voiced opposition to the plan. The variance relief, Mr. Ackerman said, “will eventually lead to the renovation of a historic structure on village property. The benefit is quite obvious here.”
“We’re all very pleased that it is going to be preserved and moved to village property,” Mr. Newbold replied.
The hearing was closed, and a determination will be announced at a future meeting.
The board was less enthusiastic about an application to move and expand a legally pre-existing cottage on the 115 Montauk Highway property owned by Michael Ostin, a music industry executive. Andrew Goldstein, representing the applicant, submitted utility bills that put to rest a question of the cottage’sContinued from A1
seeming dereliction; the board had questioned whether its pre-existing nonconforming status had been abandoned.
Citing a Z.B.A. ruling involving an Egypt Lane property owner who received permission, over the objection of an adjacent neighbor, to rebuild a derelict cottage, Mr. Goldstein said that decision strengthened his client’s position. (The neighbor later sued the village to prevent the rebuilding and lost.)
Mr. Newbold said he had reread the minutes of that application, and “the mantra, in almost every case, was ‘the same square footage, height, and dimensions.’ ”
“The village is taking a consistent position,” he said, in that a structure in a nonconforming location can be replaced in kind, but not relocated or altered.
Further, he said, Mr. Goldstein himself, when he was a member of the zoning board, had said the village’s comprehensive plan “expresses the strong sentiment against permitting any extension of pre-existing nonconforming use.”
The proposal to enlarge the cottage from 507 to 958 square feet represented an 89-percent expansion, Mr. Newbold said, while a proposed second story would raise its height from 14 to 21 feet. The applicant also wants to add one-and-a-half bathrooms. “It has been the precedent of this board to limit pre-existing structures to very close to what currently exists.”
Mr. Goldstein replied that his client’s plan did not involve an expansion of use. “The first cottage has two bedrooms, this has two bedrooms,” he said. “The fact that they’re on a different floor doesn’t mean intensifying use.”
Based on the size of the nearly 3.5-acre property, the applicant is entitled to significantly more habitable space than proposed, he added. The cottage would be used only for visiting family members and guests, he said, and Mr. Ostin has agreed to install a six-foot stockade fence, and evergreen trees of a minimum eight feet high, on the eastern and western property lines, as a condition of the variance.
The applicant could achieve the benefit sought by keeping the cottage where it is and adding square footage to the proposed main residence, Mr. Newbold said. The proposed 89-percent expansion is substantial, he said, and his colleagues agreed. “Limit it — or, we can go a little higher, but not 89-percent higher,” said John McGuirk. “Leave it as is,” said Larry Hillel.
Mr. Goldstein asked what degree of gross-floor-area increase the board would consider. “I would consider none,” said Lys Marigold, the vice chairwoman. “I don’t think this application fits any of the criteria for granting an area variance.”
Mr. McGuirk suggested that Mr. Goldstein “come back with something substantially smaller.” The hearing was adjourned, with a continuation scheduled for July 24.
The board announced one determination, granting the East Hampton Presbyterian Church a special permit to allow the installation of an air-conditioning unit along its rear wall. It is to be used in conjunction with AT&T cellular phone equipment inside the church. The permit is subject to approval by the Design Review Board, which may request modifications.