Sag Hampton Rotating Header Image

Shadow Goes Home

Jun 15th, 2009
by Saltbox.
1 comment

I usually use this space to write about issues facing our East End communities. But, every once in a while I digress from the serious side of life to honor one of those ephemeral moments that make living in Sag Hampton so rewarding. Today I joined about two hundred students, teachers, administrators and parents on Haven’s Beach as Shadow, a Gray Seal who was rescued in April and rehabilitated by the Riverhead Foundation for Marine Research and Preservation was released into the wild.

First there was a moment of sweet anticipation, as a representative of the Foundation thanked the children of Sag Harbor Elementary for adopting Shadow, and making his return to the wild possible. Then, Shadow was carried in his transport cage from the foundation’s van down to a spot near the water’s edge. One of the students was called upon to help open the cage door. As the door began to open, Shadow first stuck his nose out and then cautiously emerged from his temporary shelter. Looking a bit confused, he headed for the water, then changed his mind and tried to reverse direction and return to the safety of his cage. Apparently prepared for this eventuality, volunteers from RFMRP (as the foundation is awkwardly known), used large plywood squares to block his way, gently encouraging the seal to move seaward again, which he quickly agreed to do. A few minutes later Shadow was in the water. After swimming a few quick circles in the immediate vicinity of the beach, with just one quick backward glance, he was gone.

I’m not sure if Shadow was entirely happy about this turn of events — after all, he will now have to catch his own meals, after being hand-fed for many months — but we humans at least could bask in the happy feeling of having participated in a small worthwhile act of kindness and community. For us, it really doesn’t get any better than this.

Enjoy the photos.

Carrying Shadow to the water's edge.

Carrying Shadow to the water's edge.

A student helps to open the cage door

A student helps to open the cage door

Shadow pokes his nose out.

Shadow pokes his nose out.

Taking a look around.

Taking a look around.

Heading for the sea.

Heading for the sea.

A bit reluctant, but almost there.

A bit reluctant, but almost there.

On his way.

On his way.

A quick look back, and then he's gone.

A quick look back, and then he's gone.

Posted in: Local Events, Our Town, Schools.

Mrs. Sage’s Return on Investment

Apr 24th, 2009
by Saltbox.
No comments yet

Just about 100 years ago, Mrs. Russell Sage spent a tidy sum of money building a library for the Village of Sag Harbor and environs. She even stocked the new library with books and other materials that formed its early lending and reference collections. She was a believer in using the best materials and artisans available, and so the library she built was an elegant, stately, imposing edifice. It was also durable. She named it after an ancestor, Major John Jermain, who fought in the revolutionary war. Since that time it has been known as the John Jermain Memorial Library, and has served as the public library for Sag Harbor.

The John Jermain Memorial Library

The John Jermain Memorial Library, the public library in Sag Harbor, NY, donated to the community by Mrs. Russel Sage in 1910.

Over the intervening near century, Sag Harbor has made good use of her donation. The library has remained in its original home, adapting its programs and collection to the whims of various eras. Over the years, the inside of the building has seen a few changes — mainly the addition of many more “stacks” — the library term for bookshelves — to accommodate its growing collection. In addition a small renovation was undertaken about 15 years ago to allow the basement, formerly a storage area, to be used as a public space with a handicapped accessible entrance and bathroom. Minor repairs, and necessary replacements (the boiler, for instance) have also been undertaken, and paid for from the library’s operating budget, with monies provided by the taxpayers of the Sag Harbor school district, as are virtually all of the library’s operating expenses.

Other than the work on the basement, however, the taxpayers have not been asked to foot the bill for any refurbishment or expansion of the library building in its entire 99 years of existence. We’ve all been getting a free ride courtesy of Mrs. Sage’s commitment to high end materials and quality construction. She built it to last, and last it did…until now.

Members of the community who attended the public meeting hosted by the Library on the evening of Monday, April 20th, saw a presentation by Victor Conseco, president of Sandpebble Builders, the firm hired by the Library to do a cost analysis of its plan to refurbish and expand the building. As he spoke about the various factors that must be taken into consideration: restoration, code compliance and expansion, Mr. Conseco flipped through a depressing slide show of disrepair. From a decaying roof, to water-damaged plaster, from inadequate wiring to masonry in need of serious repointing, his presentation revealed the kind of wear and tear that is nearly invisible to regular users of the library, but jumps out at a fresh pair of eyes, especially ones trained to see these conditions.

So, as it turns out, while Mrs. Sage did a great service to many generations of Sag Harborites in providing us a library building that was seemingly capable of lasting forever, her meticulous attention to quality also misled us into believing we did not have to plan and pay for the care that any heavily used, aging structure requires. For generations, we’ve continued to rely on Mrs. Sage’s investment to pay dividends by providing us with a functional, usable library. As with any investment, though, the capital must be preserved. In this case the capital is the building, and it has been, if not squandered, at least diminished by our lack of attention.

No one can deny that Mrs. Sage’s investment in a library for Sag Harbor has paid a bountiful return on her investment. However, at this point in the building’s life a new injection of capital is required. It’s our bill to pay, and it’s long overdue.

Posted in: Historic Preservation, Libraries, Taxes.
Tagged: · · ·

Creating a Sustainable and Resilient Community

Apr 19th, 2009
by Bobbie Cohen.
1 comment

The creator of this blog, Eric Cohen, is my husband and he has generously told me I can publish things here as often as I want. Previously I have only taken him up on that offer  for one cutesy article riffing on the name Sag Hampton. Now, however, I find that I have many things I want to write about and until I develop the time and savvy to create my own blog, you’ll regularly find articles and postings from me here.

What has engendered this new-found need to communicate? I’m not sure, but I guess it stems at least in part from my recent involvement in several organizations and events that have inspired me. In no particular order, here are some of them: Organizing for America on the South Fork, 725 Green, WISE (Women’s Initiative for a Sustainable Earth) and the First New York Women’s Conference for Sustainability, which was held at Stony Brook Southampton at the end of March.

Sometimes I’ll have opinions I want to voice, but I suspect that mostly what I want to do is get information out about events that are taking place and become a go-to source of information about things happening in our area, especially if they are somewhat green in nature.

OK, so the first thing I want to share is one of the outcomes from the First New York Women’s Conference for Sustainability. While at the conference attendees broke up into various discussion groups, one of which was entitled Visioning Sustainable and Resilient Communities.  I was part of that group and we found that we only had time to scratch the surface, so we agreed to meet again at the College on April 13th.

We spent the bulk of our time discussing our goals and visions and focused on the need to articulate just what sustainability and resilience means. We took turns expressing what we felt went into the definition and one of our members, Mark Seidler volunteered to synthesize what was said and write it up for us. He captured our ideas so brilliantly and eloquently, that I want to share it here. As soon as I can, I’ll post more things about events that are taking place. In the meantime, if you’re interested in joining the conversation/action of our Sustainabiliy-Resilience group, we meet on the second Monday of each month at the Student Center at Stony Brook Southampton at 7:00 p.m. Our next meeting is May 11th.

Here is what Mark wrote:

In a material sense, sustainability implies that we don’t use more resources than we – or nature at large – can regenerate. We are all familiar with the idea that humanity’s current consumption of fossil fuels is not sustainable. A sustainable energy future depends on shifting toward renewable sources. But in attending to the quantifiable measures of resource levels, we should not forget that sustainability has a basic moral dimension: our behavior is sustainable only when it doesn’t negatively impact those generations which will succeed us.

Sustainability focuses on the idea of maintaining a quality of life and health, personally, socially, and environmentally. But we know that changes are inevitable; it appears ever more likely that we will face quite disruptive and possibly even catastrophic changes in our environment and climate, our economic system, etc. So we are increasingly speaking of another concept in conjunction with sustainability – resilience. Resilience implies that in the face of inevitable change, we as communities must develop the capacity to ‘bounce back’ – to maintain our basic physical and social health in spite of those challenges.

A key concept that many of us associate with resilience is the idea of diversity. In the study of nature, we see that strong, robust systems are diverse systems. (By contrast, agricultural practices that rely on monoculture undermine diversity and therefore reduce resilience.) Resilience can be described as the capacity to suffer abuse and still maintain – or restore – health. For those who envision the possibility of  catastrophic changes in our environment – rising oceans, droughts, fuel shortages, for example – there is a special urgency to develop resilience. Many look to do this in part by increasing self sufficiency around the resources needed to sustain life – growing more food locally, for example.

But the understanding of resilience should not be limited to material measures. Resilience is also about maintaining our capacity to function effectively as a community in the face of those insidious or precipitous changes in our material environment. To succeed as communities we need to recognize that resilience requires a kind of intellectual and cultural diversity – the capacity to be open to many points of view, to be flexible and creative in our response to problems, to nurture multiple solutions in order to increase the chances of finding the best way to adapt to changing conditions and new constraints on resources. And for this we need to refine and perfect the ways in which we communicate with each other, continuously seeking better ways to share and manage both information and mutual support. Some will add that at the heart of this process must lie love and mutual respect. 

Posted in: Community Groups, Environment, Guest Author.
Tagged: · ·

Transportation Forum Stays On Track

Apr 19th, 2009
by Saltbox.
3 comments

I’m not often surprised by politicians. Well, let me rephrase that, I’m often surprised by politicians’ venality, but much less often by their willingness to take a risk. So, I have to admit that I was taken completely by surprise when, at the Transportation Forum sponsored by New York State Assemblyman Fred Thiele, there was near unanimity among the politicians present that the East End Transportation Council should continue developing plans to build the expensive and unproven East End Shuttle rail/bus network. This consensus came after listening to a very detailed analysis of the pros and cons of this plan, and those of an alternative plan for a flexible bus network developed by the Volpe Transportation Center, an arm of the U.S. Department of Transportation, that seemed to favor the bus network.

Present at this event were quite a few of the East End’s local and regional elected officials including the supervisors of the Towns of Southampton, East Hampton, Southold and Riverhead, County Legislators Schneiderman and Romaine, Assemblyman Thiele, every member of the Southampton Town Council, members of various other town councils, and representatives from the offices of Congressman Bishop and State Senator Lavalle. The only significant player not present was the Shelter Island supervisor. Among those commenting on the transportation plans presented at the forum, only the representatives for Congresman Bishop and Senator Lavalle did not take a position, saying they would have to defer to their bosses; County Legislator Romaine left early, before his opinion could be recorded. Riverhead’s Supervisor Cardinale arrived late, and having missed the presentation said that while he could not take a strong position either way, he would, at this time, defer to the opinions of the other supervisors. Only Legislator Schneiderman voiced a dissenting opinion. Everyone else present expressed support for the development of the rail/bus network plan.

Quite frankly, I was dumbfounded. After listening to the presentation, I was sure that the local officials would use the cover provided by the Volpe Center’s more reasonably priced alternative to avoid supporting what looks to be a very difficult to implement and costly project, the outcome of which is far from certain.  But, calling the more elaborate plan “visionary,” and “of greater long-term benefit,” the politicians quickly came to consensus. How often does that happen? I’m still shocked. It certainly tore a hole in my post of a couple of weeks ago in which I asserted that the provincialism that crops up in inter-town disputes was one of the biggest problems facing the East End. Needless to say, I was thrilled at this level of cooperation. I also support the plan.

At this point some of you are probably wishing for a little background. OK, here it is. Planners have been predicting total gridlock on East End roads since at least the 1970s, and starting around then have also proposed many ways to avoid it, most of which have proven unacceptable to residents and or government officials for one reason or another. In the mid 1990s, the East End Supervisors and Mayors Association (EESMA), created a new group, the East End Transportation Council (EETC) to again study the issue, which they did…interminably. Their work eventually culminated in the 2006 release of a study known as SEEDS (Sustainable East End Development Strategies). I won’t go into that here, except to say that development of a mass transit system of some kind was one of the recommendations of the study. During the SEEDS process, a splinter group formed among the SEEDS stakeholders. The members of this splinter felt that EETC was moving too slowly, and that it was time to jump from studying the problem to developing solutions. This group became Five Towns Rural Transit (FTRT), a non-profit devoted to the development of what was to become known as the East End Shuttle.

Through the dedication and hard work of FTRT, a plan was developed that included replacement of the Long Island Rail Road service on the East End with a more frequent light rail service that would shuttle between the stations and be met by a network of feeder buses to which passengers could transfer for short rides into nearby hamlets, villages and business centers. In 2007, Assemblyman Thiele and Senator Lavalle took up the cause of FTRT and were able to obtain a matching grant  for the study and further development of the East End Shuttle concept. The East End Towns came up with the matching funds, and the EETC was given the task of finding a group capable of undertaking the study. This turned out to be the Volpe Center, which was charged with fleshing out and analyzing the feasibility of the Shuttle plan, and also with coming up with at least one alternative, so that if the plan proved unacceptable, the Towns would have a fallback strategy.

The result of this work was presented on Friday, April 17th at Suffolk Community College in Riverhead. I won’t try to recap the presentation here, as I’ve probably already worn out your patience with this long-winded post. However, in summary, I think it would be fair to say that while Volpe was favorably impressed with FTRT’s shuttle plan, they concluded that it could be prohibitively expensive, and that the results — whether or not people would use it, and whether or not it would relieve congestion on our roadways — were uncertain. The alternative they proposed, was, in their words, more flexible, less expensive, and implementable in phases — all advantages over the shuttle plan. The big disadvantage of the alternative was that the buses would run on the same clogged roadways that we all use now, resulting in long travel times, while contributing to congestion on the roads.

After the presentation, many panelists and audience members spoke eloquently in favor of the shuttle plan, in spite of its possible drawbacks. Legislator Schneiderman spoke thoughtfully and presented some additional drawbacks to the shuttle plan that had not been mentioned by Volpe. Supervisor Russell of Southold, suggested that a hybrid solution, with different approaches for the north and south forks might be the best alternative — more rail on the south fork, more buses on the north. Ultimately, the idea of a hybrid solution — details unspecified — took hold of the group, and when it came time to arrive at a consensus, a hybrid solution embodying most of the details of FTRT’s East End Shuttle, at least on the south fork, was agreed upon.

I’ve skipped over a lot of important details in this post — financing for one — which I hope to get back to another time. For now, though, I think it is enough to say that occassionally, the people we elect do their jobs with thoughtfulness and diligence, putting the greater need ahead of short term political considerations, and we should all be grateful for that, and that the *!~@$*** congestion on our roads may eventually be remedied.

Posted in: Government, Transportation.
Tagged: · · · ·

Sag Hampton moves to WordPress

Apr 18th, 2009
by Saltbox.
1 comment

After almost three years of running Sag Hampton on the Blogware platfrom, I felt it was time to move on to something a bit more flexible and with a brighter future. Blogware has not been updated in some time, and appears as if it may be a dead end in terms of features. WordPress, on the other hand, is probably the preeminent blogging software in use today. So, for those reasons, and also to help motivate me to write more, I decided to make the switch.

Readers will notice that a few things have changed, but the overall Sag Hampton experience should not be much different than what you are used to. The one obvious change is that the photo album, which used to appear on the upper left side of the screen is gone. This may return at some point, if I find a way to implement it in WordPress. For now, a sort of replacement is the revolving pictures in the page header. In theory, every time you move to a new page in Sag Hampton, a different picture will be shown at the top of the page. This worked pretty well in testing, although occasionally, the replacement picture was the same as the one being replaced. It is a random selection after all, so this is likely to happen every once in a while. ;-) Another change is that I am no longer using excerpts on the blog’s main page. Where you used to see a little snippet of the post, and then have to click on the “more” link in order to read the rest of the article you now will see the entire article, on the main page.

Also, for now, most of the other content in the sidebars is missing, including ads and links to other blogs and websites. As I get around to it, at least some of this content will return.

Finally, if you previously commented on this blog and used your real name, or an alias, you will find that your name has now been removed from the comment. This was an unavoidable side-effect of moving the blog content from one platform to the other. I have also taken this opportunity to turn off commenting on all the older posts, as most of the comments a blog receives on older posts are “comment spam” anyway. Comments will be allowed (and are encouraged) on all new posts, including the most recent, “The Five Top Problems Facing Sag Hampton.”

Oh, one more thing…if you’ve previously subscribed to Sag Hampton through RSS or e-mail, you may want to redo your subscription. In theory, all subscriptions should still work, but in reality, they may not. And, by the way, thanks for sticking with Sag Hampton, through its long hiatus.

Posted in: About This Blog, Blog Stuff.
Tagged: ·

The Five Top Problems Facing Sag Hampton

Apr 8th, 2009
by Saltbox.
No comments yet
  1. Over Development / Inappropriate Development
    Simply put, over development is the poison that will kill the golden goose. As we all know, people love this area because of its natural beauty, open vistas, fresh air, and rural feel. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that suburban sprawl, McMansion ghettos, charmless villages filled with chain boutiques and real estate offices, condos lining the waterfront, mega-yachts clogging the harbors and bumper to bumper traffic are the antithesis of the characteristics that made this place desirable. Yet, all that and more just keeps on coming. So, as we approach full build out — a scenario that’s not nearly as far away as you might think — it is ever more imperative that we speed up our progress towards that “goal” (full build-out) by dramatically reducing the amount of land available for development through upzoning and open space preservation.
  2. The Automobile
    If you live in the remote reaches of Northwest, or somewhere towards the middle of Deerfield Road in Water Mill, you better have a car so you can get to work, shopping, or the doctor’s office, because there just isn’t any other way to get there. Looked at the other way around, the fact that we almost all  have cars, has made it possible for us to build houses in these remote areas. Without cars, most of us wouldn’t put up with the inconvenience of living so far from the hamlets and villages where essential services are located. This, in a nutshell, is the cause and effect of the suburban sprawl that is rapidly destroying the beautiful vistas, unspoiled woodlands, pristine coastline and rural feeling of this area. Getting people out of their cars is a worthy goal on many levels, but one that seems almost impossible to achieve. One technique that has some hope of working, is smart growth: pushing development in close to the hamlets and villages through intensive upzoning of areas further away from the hamlet centers, and incenting developers to build and re-purpose properties closer in. This has the effect of increasing density to the point that some forms of public transportation make sense, thus getting people out of their cars, at least some of the time.
  3. The Cost of Living
    A community consisting entirely of wealthy second-home owners is not a sustainable community. As the cost of homes (and everything else) rises, working people are driven out of the community, as are the businesses they need to sustain them, and which are in turn, sustained by them. Eventually, the community itself is gone, replaced by a make-believe version that only exists for a few months of the year, and has no ability to provide the underpinnings of a real community such as a volunteer fire department and ambulance service, police department, and local government. Wealthy part-time residents don’t volunteer to serve in the fire department, or run for local office. Police can be brought in from somewhere else, but will not be as effective as a force made up, at least partially, of local residents. When local family businesses close, because their customers have been driven out of the area, what will replace them? Who will we turn to for groceries, hardware, and other household necessities? Ralph Lauren? Starbucks?  Corcoran?
  4. Provincialism/Nimbyism
    Either we all bail together, or we all sink together. Don’t want that windmill in your neighbor’s yard, or that wind farm off your coastline? Well then, tell us where we can locate them, or sit back and watch your house disappear under the rising ocean. Don’t want that bicycle path running next to your estate, or cutting across your greenbelt? Well then, you’ll just have to put up with more automobile traffic and the massive amounts of pollution it generates. Don’t want affordable housing in your community? Then say good-bye to your community (see #3 above). This problem isn’t unique to individuals either; it also applies to local governments. One example of this type of provincialism with which I am familiar is in the area of transportation. In order to solve the area’s transportation problems, it is necessary for all five east end towns to work together. Local government officials understand this, and yet only pay lip service to the concept. One town doesn’t want ferries. Another doesn’t want buses. Another wants to sue the one that doesn’t want ferries. Villages block improvements to roads because the businesspeople in those villages are afraid their bottom lines may be hurt if a few parking spaces are lost. The net result is that we’re all so busy protecting our backyards that we don’t notice that the house is burning down.
  5. Loss of Place
    A sense of place is not something you can fake. I’m a big fan of historic preservation, but when I see the facades of historic buildings acting as camouflage for obscenely swollen McMansions tucked away behind the original modest structures, I am keenly aware that something important has been lost. When local agriculture, once a mainstay of the East End’s economy has come to mean horse farms for polo ponies and jumpers, a way of life that defined this area has slipped through our fingers, along with the definition it provided. When what was traditionally an artist’s community has more art galleries than working artists, it’s an indicator that the community’s balance has shifted away from individualism and towards commercialism. When the vast majority of the people who work here come from someplace else, a large hole has been torn in the fabric of the community that robs it of its sense of place. An authentic sense of place is what makes a community vibrant. For generations, people have come here because eastern Long Island was a “real” place. Once that’s gone — and we’re pretty darn close to losing it — well, once that’s gone, what’s left is Disneyland.

Posted in: Affodable Housing, Development, Government, Historic Preservation, Local Businesses, Open Space, Our Town, Property Rights, Transportation, Values.

What Is a Blog and Does Sag Hampton Need One?

Nov 20th, 2008
by Saltbox.
2 comments

If you’re reading this online, you most likely already know what a blog is, and probably think this blog is a worthwhile undertaking. However, for my online-only readers I should explain that occasionally The Sag Harbor Express picks up a blog post from here and publishes it as an opinion piece in the print-edition of the paper. Many readers of The Express think of me as an occasional columnist for the paper, and are only marginally aware, if aware at all, that what they read in the paper has a separate life online. This post is for them.

Although you may not know it, Sag Hampton is a blog, not a newspaper column. There word blog is a shortened form of the word weblog. Weblogs are designed to allow someone, anyone, to self-publish their writing, and give voice to their opinions in a public, online forum in a format that makes it possible for readers to comment on and add their own thoughts to what has been written. So, when you read something by me in the Sag Harbor Express, I’ve actually written it for my blog on the Internet, where it has a life of its own separate from the newspaper version. I write lots of stuff online. Sometimes the editor of The Express decides to publish it in the paper, sometimes not.

Sometimes, they publish a version of what I’ve written shortened to fit in the space they have available. Sometimes they capture the essence of what I’ve written in the shorter version, but sometimes it ends up too short to really make the point I’m trying to get across. When that happens, though, you — the reader of the newspaper version — can go to the web and read the full version. You’ll always find a link to my blog at The Express’ web site: http://www.sagharboronline.com.

Now here’s the cool part. Both the editor of the newspaper and I think that it would be great to know what people in the community are thinking about the issues we write about. Sure, you can write a letter to the paper, but that may not be your style. Maybe you’re a bit more spontaneous, or would prefer a less formal way to express your thoughts. Perhaps everything you have to say about an issue can be summed up in one sentence and you think it’s just too short to make a good letter to the editor. If any of that applies to you, or you just like being a part of the online community, then the blog is made to order for you, because blogs, by design, are meant to encourage two-way communications. At the end of each article in Sag Hampton there is a place for you to leave a “comment.” In other words, a spot for you to have your say about the issue, or about what I’ve written. Others can comment too, and one person can comment on another person’s comment, giving us all a chance to have a real dialog online. Everyone can read it, everyone can participate in it. Comments can be signed, or anonymous. You must enter your e-mail address, but it is not published. Again this is different than writing a letter to the editor. When you do that, you have to sign it (even if your name isn’t published). On the blog, you can be completely anonymous if you chose. Even I won’t know who you are.

I blog (yes, it’s a verb too) because I want to start a discussion with other members of my community; so I invite you to visit Sag Hampton online where you can not only read the full text of every article (called blog posts), but also find other posts that were never published in the newspaper. And best of all, you can add your two cents (or more) to the discussion.

By the way, for those of you who do read Sag Hampton online, I would love it if instead of stopping me on the street to discuss what I’ve written (or in addition to that), you would add a comment to the blog. Even if it’s only to say that you agree (or disagree). It’s great  for me to know what you think, but not so great that you’re depriving the rest of the community of the benefit of you opinion. Please share your thoughts with the rest of the community on Sag Hampton.

Posted in: About This Blog, Blog Stuff.

Why Isn’t the Village of Sag Harbor Supporting the Sag Harbor Gateway Study?

Oct 20th, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

It would seem, at first glance, to be a no-brainer. The Southampton Planning Department recently completed a study that recommends changing the zoning of a small area along the Sag Harbor-Bridgehampton Turnpike (the “Gateway” to Sag Harbor) from Highway Business to Hamlet Office. Since this area lies outside the Village’s borders, its zoning is under the control of the Town. It was the Town-appointed Sag Harbor Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) that initially suggested that a study be conducted; however, it was only after the study received the active support of the Village’s Mayor that the Town agreed to go ahead with it. Given that the study had the support of the Mayor, the CAC, CONPOSH, The Friends of the Long Pond Greenbelt, and other organizations, it would seem, as I said, a no-brainer that the Village would now endorse its findings, and encourage the adoption of the recommended change in zoning. Yet, the Village Trustees recently passed on an opportunity to make such a recommendation to the Southampton Town Board. Why?

A little background may be in order. Highway Business is one of, if not the most, permissive of zoning categories. Virtually anything is allowed, car dealerships, lumber yards, car washes, warehouses, and more — basically the same mix of businesses that you currently find along County Road 39 in Southampton. It’s not pretty. The Hamlet Office category is quite a bit more restrictive, allowing a much smaller mix of low-traffic types of businesses, such as, well, offices. Private residences are also allowed. In fact, the character of an area zoned as Hamlet Office is, by design, primarily residential. Hamlet Office-zoned locales are meant to serve as transitional zones between the surrounding residential areas and the commercial hamlet centers. On the other hand, the character of an area zoned Highway Business is unapologetically strip mall. So, under current zoning, the area along the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike just outside the Village could end up populated with high-traffic, high-intensity businesses of the most unattractive variety. Again, think County Road 39.

As previously stated, in the study the Southampton Planning Department recommended that given the nature of the area, changing views of the community as to the types of development found acceptable in residential areas, as well as environmental concerns related to the proximity of Long Pond Greenbelt, Ligonee Creek and related wetlands, the zoning be changed, and that the preferred alternative should be Hamlet Office.

Now, you may have noticed that there are already a few businesses along this part of the Turnpike. What would happen to them if the zoning were to change? Nothing. They would be, of right, grand-fathered as pre-existing non-conforming businesses, and would be allowed to continue as such basically forever.

Yet, at least one of these business owners is not happy with the proposed change. Robert Reid, of Reid Brothers Inc., has voiced his opposition to the change, stating that it will limit his ability to further develop his property in some, as yet unspecified, way. He is, of course, correct in that if he should desire, say to develop his property in a way that would substantively change the nature of the business conducted there, it would not be allowed. Not long ago, Mr. Reid did propose such a change, but withdrew his plan when it was determined that the potential environmental impact was of a significant enough nature to require a full environmental impact study (EIS).

With that background in mind, let’s look again at the Village Trustees’ lack of support for Southampton’s Draft Gateway Study, which was undertaken at the Mayor’s request to protect the visual and enviromental integrity of one of the main entrances to  Sag Harbor Village. The only opposition to the study’s recommendations has come from two of the businesses in the study area (which, you will recall is outside the of the Village’s borders). Should that matter to the Village Trustees? Well, maybe…

Maybe it would if one of the business owners had offered his property as a staging area for the trucks and work crews at the recently approved Bulova Watchase condominium project. It would especially matter if that property owner was the developer’s only remaining option for a staging area, after having been refused access to other areas they had proposed for this purpose. Still, the business owner will be paid by the Bulova developers for the use of his property, so why should the Village be concerned about voicing approval for the Gateway Study even if the property owner in question, Mr. Reid, doesn’t care for it? I suspect the answer has something to do with the EIS that Reid never undertook for a project that looked quite similar to the use his property will be put to by the Bulova contractors. Reid’s previous proposal called for a “contractor’s” garage and storage area, that would allow contractors from out of the area to store their trucks, equipment and supplies at a local “depot,” which could then be used as a staging area for their work crews each morning as they arrived here from the companies’ home offices further west. That propsed use was deemed possibly too intensive for the location, and so an EIS was required before the project could continue. This time around, no study is required since no construction is involved, even though the propsed use is very similar to Reid’s original plan.

However, this use of the property, which is unrelated to the Reid’s current business there, flies in the face of the conclusions of the Gateway Study, which, if adopted, would prohibit such a change in use for a pre-existing, non-conforming business. It also, creates the potential for the type of serious environmental impact that led the Town’s Planning Board to previously require the EIS.

Still, you may ask, why should the Village Trustees let this interfere with their endorsement of a change that would be of great benefit to the Village while costing them nothing? Well you may ask, and I hope you do. One factor which may be relevant is that prior to the Bulova project’s approval, much pressure was exerted on the Village government by the business community and others on behalf of the Bulova devleopers. At times, these folks made it seem that the entire future of the Village depended on the Bulova project being approved. As we all know, the project was ultimately approved, but perhaps that feeling of desparation persists. If so, it could be clouding the vision of our elected representatives to the point where they feel they must protect the interests of the developers, whatever the cost in other areas. Maybe, maybe not. It’s a question worth asking, though.

Posted in: Development, Government, Property Rights.

Is There Poverty in the Hamptons?

Oct 15th, 2008
by Saltbox.
1 comment

I’m taking part in Blog Action Day, which is today, October 15, 2008. On this day, bloggers all over the world are writing on one topic: poverty. Most blogs have a theme — something that serves as the subject matter, or at least background — for all the articles in the blog. Some themes lend themselves more easily to a post on poverty than others. My theme, as you probably know, is the Hamptons, with a focus on Sag Harbor. Poverty, in any form, rarely comes to mind when one discusses the Hamptons, except perhaps as the antithesis of the Sag Hampton lifestyle. This makes writing about poverty a bit of a challenge for me, if I’m going to try to stick to my theme — which I mostly try to do.

So, I thought a little research might be in order to find out if there is any poverty in the Hamptons. Here’s what I found out:

According to NationMaster.com, data from the 2000 Census (the latest data available) shows that in the Town of Southampton, “The median income for a household in the town is $53,887, and the median income for a family is $65,144. Males have a median income of $47,167 versus $32,054 for females. The per capita income for the Town is $31,320. 8.3% of the population and 5.3% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 10.2% of those under the age of 18 and 6.0% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line.“

In the Town of East Hampton in the year 2000 (again, according to NationMaster.com) the situation was similar. “The median income for a household in the town is $52,201 and the median income for a family is $60,743. Males have a median income of $42,041 versus $31,732 for females. The per capita income for the Town is $31,300. 9% of the population and 6.7% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 11.2% of those under the age of 18 and 6.2% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line.“  (This data was corrected by me to reflect actual U.S. Census data for the Town of East Hampton. The NationMaster article reported data for the East Hampton CDP  — Census Designated Place — which is different than the Town. Don’t ask me how it’s different; I only have so much patience for research.)

The government uses a table to determine the poverty level for households of differing compositions. Here are two examples for the year 2000: A household of four people, two of them under 18 years of age, would be classified as poor if their annual income was below $17,463; a household of two people where the “householder” is over sixty-five would be classified as poor if their annual income was below $10,419. (Those figures were increased to $21,550 and $12,027 respectively for the year 2007.) Combined, the two towns comprising the South Fork had a population of 74,431 in the year 2000, of which 6,126 individuals lived in government-defined poverty. That’s 8.2% of the population, over 1,000 families, who were living in poverty in the Hamptons in the year 2000.

As a point of reference, a couple who are both employed full time (37.5 hours/week) in minimum wage ($7.15 p.h.) jobs, working 51 weeks a year (1 week unpaid vacation, no sick days, no personal days) would gross $27,349 for that year. If they have two children, they would be slightly above the 2007 poverty level — assuming neither one misses much work due to personal or family illness, or other obligations.

So, clearly, the answer is yes, there is poverty in the Hamptons. Who is poor? My research abilities do not extend to that level of detail, but I’m guessing I know at least one family, probably more, who are struggling to make ends meet here in one of the nation’s wealthiest communities. I’m also guessing a few of my retired friends may be close to the poverty borderline too, especially now, after the recent economic meltdown has either jacked up their mortgage rate, devastated their invested retirement funds, or both.

Then, of course, we have the sad state of affairs, often commented on in this blog: the complete lack of affordable housing. This dearth of reasonably priced places to live  is driving lower- and middle-class people out of the area. Even with what might be considered adequate incomes elsewhere, these folks can’t find a place to live in Sag Hampton. Now, compounding this crisis — and a crisis is what it is for reasons that have been documented elsewhere on this blog — we have the credit crunch, which makes getting a mortgage impossible even for those half-dozen or so lucky individuals who have actually found a home they can afford to buy.

But, I digress. From a poverty perspective, the “affordable housing” problem is not about the folks who can’t find a place to live, it’s about those who have managed to find a place to call home, but in order to afford it have to devote an impossibly high percentage of their income to paying the rent or mortgage. At the end of every month they then find themselves without enough money to pay for other necessities of life. The result is a class of people who, while earning incomes substantially above the government’s poverty level, still can’t afford to both eat and get healthcare; pay their taxes, and buy fuel oil; buy work clothes and buy gas to get to work. It’s poverty Sag Hampton style, but the effects are nonetheless debilitating. Ultimately, these families are forced to make a decision as to whether they want to stay here, in the communities in which they were nurtured, close to family and friends, or to move somewhere else where they will be able to afford all the necessities of life.

So, poverty comes in different forms. I wouldn’t think of comparing the plight of cash-strapped homeowners in Sag Harbor, to the refugees in Darfur. The suffering faced by refugees and the victims of war, famine, despotic governments, and natural disasters, the world over is several orders of magnitude more severe than anything seen in Sag Hampton. Yet, poverty on any level has serious repercussions for both the individual and the community. Our towns and the people in them are not immune to this disease; it’s here among us and requires a personal response from each of us. In the land of the $10.00 bowl of oatmeal, no one should be cold or hungry.

Do something:
The Sag Harbor Food Pantry
Long Island Cares
Peconic Habitat for Humanity

If you know of other worthwhile local organizations, please add their contact information in the comments. Thanks.

Posted in: Affodable Housing, Blog Action Day, Values.

Share the Road?

Sep 22nd, 2008
by Saltbox.
5 comments

A few weeks ago I included an anecdote about bike paths in one of my posts here on Sag Hampton. It was just an anecdote in an article that was about something else entirely — but I made the point that a bike path could be beneficial in jump starting increased use of bicycles as a means of transportation, in addition to the way they’re mostly used — as a form of recreation. In that post, I did not develop the idea at any length, because — well, the article was about something else. This past weekend though, the need for more bike-friendly roadways was brought home to me in a very powerful way.

On Sunday, Bobbie and I were on our way to New York to visit some freinds from my college days. As we were driving down Scuttlehole Road, we began to pass a steady stream of bicyclists. The further we went, the more bicyclists there were. Obviously, it was some sort of planned ride. Now as anyone who has driven or biked on Scuttlehole knows, this road is far from an ideal place to ride a bicycle. It is a major back road “shortcut” used by countless motorists to avoid the stretch of Montauk Highway that bottlenecks in Bridgehampton. It’s also a quick way to get to Sag Harbor, and maybe, via Rt. 114 to East Hampton and beyond. Unfortunately, although it’s used by an inordinately large number of vehicles, it is only two lanes wide (one in each direction), has many twists and turns, at least one of which is entered blindly from either direction, a roundabout that can barely accommodate the cars that squeeze through it (and can’t accommodate the trucks and buses that also use this back country road) and has no shoulders anywhere along its length. In short, a road that’s barely safe for motorists, and entirely unsuitable for any other form of transportation.

Well, as I was saying, riding along this very dangerous road, which was crowded with weekend traffic, were at least fifty or sixty cyclists strung out over its entire length. Now, as inconvenient as this was for me as a driver, I’m not going to say that they did not have a right to be there. They were clearly well within their rights. I’m also not going to vent about the few who found it necessary to ride two and even three abreast, forcing traffic to a crawl behind them. Annoying, but not a crime. But what I am going to complain about, and LOUDLY, was that at least two of these bicyclists had children riding along with them in this potentially deadly exercise. One had what looked to be a homemade tandem bike, larger in the front, and smaller in  back so his child could ride along behind him. This one wobbled so badly at one point that Bobbie and I both flinched as we thought they were going to tumble over in front to our car. The other cyclist with child was towing one of those covered child carriers behind his bike. I assume there was a very young child inside, or what would be the point of towing the device? I was and am aghast that any parent would knowingly subject his or her child to a situation as fraught with peril as riding a bike on Scuttlehole road. I can see no justification/excuse for that behavior. And, as we all should do with our friends who have had too much to drink, their bicycling buddies should have “taken away their keys,” rather than acquiescing to this insanity.

OK, these two parents were irresponsible, and it made me sad and angry, but why blog about it? The answer is simply that bicycles, whether for recreation, sport, or transportation have long been part of the local scene here in Sag Hampton, and as fuel costs continue to rise with no relief in sight (or even possible, despite the “drill baby drill” nonsense) we will undoubtedly see an ever increasing number of bicycles on our roads. Where will they go to fit in safely? And, if a bicyclist wants to ride from Sag Harbor to Water Mill, and bring his or her child along, what route will they travel? Currently, there is no good answer to these questions. Yes, there is a Bike Committee in Southampton Town. All volunteers, they have done an admirable job of putting together a plan for bike paths, lanes, and routes (all different, but that’s another story). However, given the restrictions they have had to work under, the plan is fragmented and incomplete. Even if fully implemented, best case you will be able ride safely on some roads, but not others. This may work for recreational bikers, but it’s wholly inadequate for anyone hoping to use a bicycle for serious transportation.

That’s a shame, because a road system that truly accommodates bikers is not only good for them, but good for the rest of us too. More people on bikes means fewer people in cars. Fewer cars on the roads means less traffic, less pollution, less noise, fewer automobile accidents, and fewer frayed tempers. It could also mean fewer overweight children and adults, as we get in shape by rediscovering our ability to generate our own power. As more of us get in shape, we remove some of the strain on our precarious health care system, and potentially lower the cost of health insurance for everyone. (When there are more healthy people in a plan, the insurer faces less risk, and can lower the cost to all members of the plan.)

So, in a perverse way I’m grateful to those two irresponsible parents who endangered their children on Scuttlehole road this weekend, because they’ve made me think more deeply about why our local governments need to get off their asses and get to work developing a serious plan to make our roadways more accommodating to bicyclists. A few “Share the Road” signs are not a plan. Really. There are lots of good reasons to get out ahead of this issue before it reaches critical mass. This time, let’s not wait until the issue has to be addressed because of a rising accident toll a la County Road 39.

And, since you were probably wondering, no, I don’t (currently) ride a bike.

Posted in: Behavior, Transportation.

← Earlier Posts