Something Smells Fishy at the End of Gin Lane

Over the past couple of years my pereservation instints have become more fine tuned, and something tells me to be very suspicious of whatever's in the works for the east end of Gin Lane. Last May I wanted to take a better photo of #436 (Halcyon Lodge) for a friend, so I drove by and saw a dumpster out front. Hmmm. It's not every day someone decides they have that much junk to get rid of, unless they are doing renovations. But I continued along my way. Then, last month, during a sunny walk on the beach, I was gazing at the spectacular and original cottage colony home, with a 1951 Phillip Johnson addition, when I began to look closer, and then closer. That's when I noticed that the house is really being neglected. The gutters have been removed, the slate roof is worn so thin you can see the ghosts of its framing coming through, the main roof lines are undulating, there are decorative trim pieces missing, peeling paint, missing shingles and shutters, etc. (Image attached. Go ahead, zoom in.) It clearly isn't being kept up with. But why?

The owners, Mr. and Mrs. Scott Bommer (of SAB Capital (hedge fund guru, aka not struggling financially and therefore seemingly fully able to maintain the property) also just bought a Fifth Av. co-op for 34.6 million in September), acquired the property to the east #450, just this past October for 14.5 million. This is the property where the main house, Sandhurst, was demolished in the 1938 hurricane (image afterwards attached) but the carriage house survives and has long since been converted into a quaint and picturesque home in its own right (image attached). But either I am paranoid (often a historic preservation job hazard) or the writing is on the wall: the owners have a village treasure at #436 which they are not maintaining, and have now bought #450 which was approved to be demolished previously. Sounds like someone wants a new dream house on Gin Lane. Well, you know what? The only way that can be accomplished is by also getting approval to demolsh #436 (or do it illegally, for which a penalty can include reconstruction), and if that is requested, you can be sure I will sound the alarms. 436 Gin Lane is one of the Village's most significant and noteworthy pieces of architecture and it would be tragic for the street, the neighborhood, the Village and the Town to lose it.

I have written details about these properties before. In a nutshell, this residence was built in 1893 for Rev. and Mrs. William "Billy" Chester. It is a rare survivng Stick Style cottage and exemplifiesy the character of the Southampton village cottage colony. In addition, the presence of a piece of Phillip Johnson's oeuvre in this village is something to be proud of and protect vigorously.

Whoever is assigned with the task of getting approval to have #436 demolished will probably argue that the addition wasn't by Johnson which isn't true and is easily proved. They will say that the structure has been altered and therefore its integrity is compromised. Really, only the windows have been replaced - and they can be restored pretty easily - so that's rubbish. And of course they will say that structurally the house is a mess and "too far gone to be saved." A structural engineer's report is pretty easy to come by and will say whatever you want it to say. For every report that claims a structure is unsalvageable, I can produce one that says the opposite. It's all a matter of what you want to hear.

I know Gin Lane property is hard to come by, but this is a matter of what is best for the community. Dream Home vs. Piece of Irreplaceable Original Historic Architecture/Local History.

Rumor has it that the current owners are good friends with the Sugarmans, who have a modern compound further west on Meadow Lane and may wish the same for themselves, only here on Gin Lane. Well, how about this scenario? The Fords (yes, Henry Ford 2nd), owned this house and commissioned the Johnson addition. Originally however, they commissioned him to build a whole residence on another site; it isn't certain why they ultimately settled on the addition. Regardless, how about a modern Johnson-esque re-envisioning of the two lots, integrating the original Stick Style cottage into the scheme? Maybe I'll get a friend of mine to whip up a sketch of what this could look like. The point is, I think a compromise could be reached: one that keeps an historic treasure intact, satisfying the needs of the village, but also satisfies modernistic renovation and enlargement aspirations of the current owners. Stay tuned.