WestportNow Teardown of the Day: 31 Woody Lane

8 thoughts on “WestportNow Teardown of the Day: 31 Woody Lane”

1. What sad news to wake up to!  This beautiful house is coming down for what reason?  I am sure that someone would love to buy this antique 1900 house, but it appears that it may have been a family transfer.  There is nothing wrong with the huge homes being erected, but why not buy a house without a lot of history and tear it down instead?  Leave the homes that cannot be replaced for those who appreciate beauty, history and uniqueness.  We can all coexist in Westport IF we keep the special homes so that our town continues to have character and charm for all of us as we drive around town.

   Reply

2. Yet more depressing news from the Westport Building Department…..  Could someone please come forward and tell us what is wrong with this beautiful historic house with so much character and history that contributes to the many reasons why one wants to live in Westport?
   Rhoda Berke

   Reply

3. Well, if you folks like it so much, buy it and do what you want with it – keep it in pristine condition, remodel it or tear it down and build something new and tasteful (I don’t know that it is a foregone conclusion the replacement home will be in poor taste.)  As long as whatever is built is in conformity with applicable P&Z regs, the owner of the property is free to do with it as he sees fit, and as he chooses to spend his money. We don’t live in one big subdivision with deed coveneants, and thank God for that, since my idea of what I like (color-wise, style-wise, perhaps even size-wise) might not fit with what the “taste-board” commands.

   OK, so that’s how I feel, and I need to divorce myself from the attachment I may have to a 1900-built home that someone has paid good money for and is exercising their rights. BUT, the rest of the story is this home is the original farmhouse that sat at the very end of a 1/2 mile long lane it had all to itself for nearly 70 years, which later became Woody Lane, and other homes began to appear starting in 1969. The house is charming, but I don’t know if it is architecturally significant. Back in the early 70’s, a couple lived there, and their daughter Karen was killed in a plane crash when she was all of 23.

   And I know Woody Lane is 1/2 mile long since I walked it every day to the school bus stop at the top of the road; I grew up two houses away from this house. And I would love to see everything from my youth preserved in a time capsule for my enjoyment, but that’s not at all fair to whomever the current owner of 31 Woody Lane might be, and their right to build a new house there if they so choose.

   Your opinions may vary, of course!

   Reply

4. I’m not saying the owner doesn’t have the right to tear it down.  Obviously he does. My comment is more a cultural question about our disregard for historic preservation, and our apparent need for newness, bigness and sameness.

   Imagine if Williamsburg, VA or Cape May, NJ got the McMansion itch.  They wouldn’t be quite so special anymore, would they? 

   Having lived all over the country and having many times witnessed what overdevelopment has done to many communities that were once the creme de la creme of America, with every ounce of uniqueness knocked out of them, I just think it’s a shame we are so cavalier about it. 

   Winston Churchill said it best:  “We shape our buildings; thereafter, our buildings shape us.” 

   As we tear down and build new, we need to ask ourselves:  What exactly are we creating?

   Reply

5. Great. We’re tearing down yet another enchanting antique home to put up yet another big, soulless box.  This house is loaded with charm and character, and is headed for the junkyard.  We should be ashamed that we’re such dreadful stewards of our heritage and history. 

   What’s it going to take to save the properties that give Westport what little identity and spirit of place it still has?  At the rate we’re going, Westport will soon look like every affluent suburb in America.  Great.

   Reply

6. We lived in this house from the mid ‘80s until 1995, so I am well aware of its charms (and problems).  The 1900 construction date is when the building was converted to a summer residence by a family from New Jersey.  The core of the house (on the right in the photo) is an older barn.  This part of the house is well worth saving with lovely high ceilings, hand hewn beams and a wonderful fieldstone fireplace with a massive hearthstone which we were told came from the property.  The original barn siding is visible in several places.  That being said, there have been several additions over the years that would be no loss if demolished.  The ideal solution would probably be for a talented and sympathetic architect to reuse the historic and attractive old barn as part of a new house with 21st century amenities.  We would love to see this kind of thing happen more often.  Just takes imagination!

   Reply

7. Amy, you and I are on the same page. My unspoken point was that, if the community (not just the vocal folks) desires to limit tear-downs or somehow restrict the size of new homes (perhaps relative to lot size) then the way to accomplish that goal is through zoning regulations or building department regulations. A recent article in the Architectual Record describes the efforts of some communities to do so:

   http://www.archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/071010downsize.asp

   Reply

8. Barbara – So glad you chimed in, since you know more about this house than anyone.  I remember it well from the last time I was in it, almost 20 years ago!  Which is precisely the point. The original barn is so charming and wonderful, it’s exactly those qualities that make it so memorable!  I don’t think the same can be said for most of the cookie cutter new construction that has taken over our town. 

   Jack – Thanks for the Architectural Record article. Great stuff. You should send it on to our friends at P&Z as food for thought.  Innovation and courage are clearly in order here. 

   Maybe since the owners are going to tear this house down anyway, they’d offer the original barn to someone for free to move to a new site? That way, an historic house is saved from the wrecking ball and the owners get a cleared lot.  Win-win. 

   I’ll take first dibs.

   Reply