Sag Hampton » Local Businesses

The Five Top Problems Facing Sag Hampton

Saltbox — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 01:22:00 +0000

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.
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.
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?
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.
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.

Knowing When to Say Maybe

Saltbox — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 03:19:00 +0000

I recently received an e-mail advising me of a meeting to discuss possible developments, including a convenience store, at the Harbor Heights Mobil station on Rt. 114 in Sag Harbor. This e-mail was the first I’d heard of this possibility, and I have not tried to verify any of the information in the message. For all I know the whole thing may be a rumor, but it did make me think. The writer of the message conveyed a feeling that a convenience store at this location would be an undesirable development, and that the meeting would be one at which local residents might begin to organize against this possibility.

As readers of this blog know, I have often taken positions against mindless development in the Sag Hampton area…but not against all development, and in this case I had some doubts about the wisdom of opposing the possible changes at the Mobil station.

For one thing, the existing gas station is an eye-sore. If the proposal for a convenience store were to include an appropriate renovation of the existing building, and cleanup and landscaping of the property, it would, I think, be an improvement over current conditions. In addition, access in and out of the existing gas-station is an uncontrolled nightmare for all traffic on that road, including not only those entering and leaving the station, but also through-traffic, bicyclists and pedestrians. Again, if the addition of the convenience store were to include a well-designed traffic-access plan for the entire site, it would be a major improvement to both convenience and safety.

Further, the writer of the call-to-arms e-mail posited that traffic on Rt. 114 is increasing, and that the increased traffic poses serious problems both for the historic homes along the road, and the residents of those homes. This may well be true; however, it does not follow that a convenience store added to an existing high-traffic business on that road will substantially contribute to a further increase in traffic. Probable users of a convenience store at that location would be people who are either already on the road going somewhere else, or customers of the gas station. I do not believe that a gas-station convenience store on Rt. 114 would become a “destination” like the centrally-located 7-11 in the village.

Now, all that said, I’m not saying that I’m in favor of a convenience store at Harbor Heights. What I am saying is that citizens who are concerned about the future of our area — as we all should be — need to carefully weigh the merits of each development proposal before deciding whether to speak out against it. Sometimes there are subtle benefits to a community in a proposal that may at first seem like a bad idea. An example from a few years ago perfectly illustrates how hard it can be to spot benefits that lie just below the surface.

Not long ago, a bike path was proposed that would run between Bridgehampton and East Hampton. Unfortunately, for a short distance this path would have cut across the southern end of the Long Pond Greenbelt. Now mind you, this is a bike path we’re talking about, not a road. No motor vehicles allowed. But, one or two influential folks who like to ride their horses in the area the bike path would cross, felt that the Greenbelt, while a fine place to travel on horseback, would be despoiled by bicycle traffic. You may agree, or you may think that bikes crossing a small section of the Greenbelt on a controlled path would be a worthwhile trade-off to help jump start a much needed alternative method of transportation, that might even get a few carbon-belching cars off our overburdened roads. Ultimately, however, the folks opposed to the bike path carried the day, and so while we preserved a small piece of our natural habitat, we lost the possibility of achieving something that might have resulted in a greater good for the entire area.

Both proposals — the convenience store and the bike path — illustrate how as we exhaust the possibilities for development on Long Island’s east end, the choices we have to make become increasingly difficult, and fraught with the possibility of missteps. What to oppose and what to promote becomes a more and more difficult decision every day. (Bulova, anyone?) As concerned stewards of this land we (temporarily) occupy, we have a responsibility to be aware of the myriad needs of the many communities with which we share this space — each with differing and often conflicting needs and requirements. Finding a balanced approach to development by keeping our eyes and our minds open to all possibilities is key to ensuring that Sag Hampton remains a livable, sustainable, enjoyable place to call home.

Save Sag Harbor (Cinema)

Saltbox — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:19:00 +0000

Yikes! This is serious. The Sag Harbor Cinema is for sale. There’s nothing more iconic in Sag Harbor than the Sag Harbor Cinema, the art-house theater that’s been a part of the local scene for decades. Just look at all the fuss that arose when my fellow Sag Harborites thought they were losing the theater’s sign! Now, it seems, we may be in danger of losing the entire theater and all that it stands for.

I know that a phrase like “all that it stands for” is a bit pretentious when talking about a commercial enterprise; but the Sag Harbor Cinema does a darn good job of representing the iconoclastic nature of our village in an easily identifiable way. It is after all an art house theater that plays lesser-known, usually small-budget, quirky, independent movies. Doesn’t that sound a lot like Sag Harbor itself? OK, well we’re not really lesser-known anymore, and we’re losing our small budget cachet, but we’re still arty, quirky and independent; in a nice example of symmetry, the Sag Harbor Cinema is one of the features of our village that keeps us that way.

It’s old, and slightly seedy, with a musty smell and seats that fall somewhat short of comfortable, but so what? Where else can you find so many stimulating and entertaining foreign and independent films week in and week out? East Hampton? I think not. Southampton? Don’t make me laugh. Westhampton? Where? OK, so maybe you don’t go to foreign or independent films that often, but isn’t it nice to know that you can see one locally now and again if it should come to your attention? Unfortunately, I suspect that most of us (myself included) don’t go to this type of film all that often, which probably means that the owner of the Sag Harbor Cinema isn’t exactly raking in the dough. It also means that it will probably be tough to find someone who wants to buy the theater to keep it going as it is.

On the other hand, the alternatives are pretty unsatisfactory. While the facade of the building may, or may not, be protected if it is designated as an historic landmark — it’s not clear that it is — anything could happen on the inside of the building. Perhaps it will be split up into several small retail spaces, or one large one. With retail rents being what they are, the probable inhabitants of such spaces will most likely be limited to high-end designer boutiques. Not exactly the small-scale, mom and pop businesses for which our village is known and loved. Whatever it ends up becoming, it will be a far cry from the integral part of the village it is today.

Now we come to the part of the post where a more ingenious thinker would lay out a strategy for preserving the theater in some way that would be more acceptable then turning it into boutiques. If only that writer were penning this article! Unfortunately, all we’ve got here is me, and I haven’t a clue as to what can be done. Here’s the best I can come up with: Let’s all start going to the movies more often here in Sag Harbor. Perhaps, if we do so consistently, we can make the Sag Harbor Cinema a more economically viable business that may attract a buyer interested in maintaining this local institution just as it is (perhaps with more comfortable seats). Got any better ideas? Think the Library should buy it? Add your thoughts to the comments section below. Otherwise, I’ll see you at the movies.

Saving Sag Harbor

Saltbox — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:49:47 +0000

There’s a new and very active group in our community calling itself Save Sag Harbor. Its primary mission is to preserve Main Street’s traditional look and business mix — mostly small locally-owned stores and restaurants — by preventing national chains and big box stores like CVS from moving in and driving up commercial rents to the point where they are the only businesses that can afford to have a presence here. For an example of what that looks like, visit East Hampton. As regular readers of this blog can probably guess, I’m very sympathetic to this cause. But, the name of the group strikes me as problematic.

The problem I see can best be stated as a question. Would Sag Harbor actually be “saved” if chain stores were outlawed here? And, that question leads me to another: what would a saved Sag Harbor be like? Let’s start with the easy stuff. Clearly, there would not be a CVS here. With CVS out of the picture, Sing City, the liquor store and 7 Eleven would be able to stay. Did I say 7 Eleven? That’s odd. 7 Eleven is definitely a chain, and a few short years ago nobody wanted them here either. I thought I was starting with the easy stuff, but I’m already running into difficulty. Fortunately for Sag Harbor, 7 Eleven’s original franchisee, the Young family, was determined to prove that 7 Eleven could be a good, if not perfect, neighbor. They obviously succeeded, since no one talks about keeping out 7 Eleven anymore. Quite the opposite. We want them to stay. Times change, as does our perception of a “saved” Sag Harbor.

I know it sounds like I’m revving up to defend CVS, Starbucks and their ilk. Trust me, I’m not. I just want to point out that one has to think carefully about the issues facing our little village. Nothing is ever quite as straightforward as it seems. Another example of this is historic preservation. Everyone’s for that. Right? A saved Sag Harbor would certainly retain its place in the National Register of Historic Places. Well, yes, but I have a couple of quibbles with Sag Harbor’s Architectural Review Board. It seems they are, to put it mildly, resistant to alternative power generation devices, such as solar panels and wind turbines. I find this attitude quaint, which I guess is appropriate for people whose mission is to preserve the past. However, I pose this question to the ARB: how quaint will Sag Harbor be when the entire historic district is under water? It’s pretty clear that the world’s best hope for preventing the polar ice caps from melting is for many people to take many small steps to conserve energy and reduce carbon emissions. Unfortunately for the historic purity of our village, that includes people who live in historic homes. Which is worse, solar panels or homes under water? In my version of a saved Sag Harbor, there are solar panels on many roofs.

Now for my other quibble with the ARB. In spite of the fact that I’m in favor of allowing solar panels and/or modest wind turbines to appear on the roofs of historic homes in our village, I really am strongly in favor of historic preservation; so much so, in fact, that I question whether the ARB and the other agencies that regulate the look of our Village are too. As I walk down our lovely streets, I find my sensibilities assaulted by what appear to be charming historic homes with huge inflated cancers growing on them. What the heck is up with 168 Main Street? Is Ira Rennert moving to Sag Harbor? What about the house across the Street from 168 Main where a small cottage was expanded to three or four times its original size, all of which expansion is clearly visible from the street? How can one say the historic look of that house has been preserved? Clearly the codes governing the expansion of historic homes are not adequate in the face of today’s “bigger is better” home owners. In my version of a saved Sag Harbor, this trend will not only be stopped, but reversed.

Unfortunately, the questions only get harder. What to do about traffic? Sag Harbor is a delightfully walkable community; or it would be if there were fewer cars on the roads. Have you ever tried to cross at the intersection of Jermain and Madison on foot? Clearly, until we get people out of their cars, Sag Harbor will continue to suffer from ever increasing traffic woes. An integrated network of light rail, buses, and…gasp!…passenger ferries would go a long way toward enabling people to come to Sag Harbor while leaving their cars at home. Can we truly say that Sag Harbor is saved if we don’t address the traffic problems?

Another tough one: affordable housing. I’ve always believed that what sets Sag Harbor apart from the surrounding communities, and made it the best place to live in the Hamptons is its heterogeneous mix of social, economic and ethnic populations. Not only was there a healthy mix of different types and classes of people, but also, these groups were not divided. Everyone lived side by side in the same neighborhoods. As in a classroom where students of differing abilities are mixed together, everyone benefits. In a village, it’s the year-round, working families that provide the necessary infrastructure, and a good deal of the character of the place. They, in turn benefit from the culture and economic opportunity provided by the second-home owners. Cultures mix and something new and better emerges. Homogeneity — in this case represented by a community of only the wealthy — results in inbreeding and an ultimately sterile environment, lacking in all the charm that attracted people here in the first place. Unfortunately, the “free” market in real estate has killed any hope of retaining the mixed economic neighborhoods of Sag Harbor past. Artificial life-support in the form of mandated affordable housing units is the only hope of preserving some remnant of this tradition. To really save it though, the affordable units must be integrated into all new housing developments, not segregated in affordable-only sub-divisions. In a saved Sag Harbor, there are affordable units in the Bulova condo renovation too.

Speaking of condos, I would say that without a doubt the monstrous and obtrusive condo development proposed by Michael Maiden for Ferry Road near Long Wharf has no place in a saved Sag Harbor. This property clearly must be acquired and preserved by local government for use as a public space. If allowed to go through, the impact of those condos on the character and livability of Sag Harbor’s downtown will be overwhelming, maybe even a tipping point beyond which “Saving Sag Harbor” becomes an empty rallying cry.

There are, of course, other issues that need to be addressed before Sag Harbor can be considered saved: bike lanes and sidewalks, the library, open space preservation (yes, even in Sag Harbor) and more — too many to address in one sitting at the keyboard. None of this is simple; all of it is interrelated. Saving Sag Harbor requires action on many fronts by an informed and concerned populous. It is not now, and never will be a one-issue campaign.

————————————————————-
Currently listening to: Who Will Save Your Soul? by Jewel

Where are the Japanese/Korean Car Dealers?

Saltbox — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:40:00 +0000

This is an actual and honest question. If anyone knows the answer, please let the rest of us know by posting a comment.

The question is: Why are there no Toyota, Honda, Subaru, Nissan, Mazda, Mitsubishi or Hyundai dealers anywhere in Sag Hampton? Don’t tell me they’re in Riverhead, that’s 50 minutes away when there’s no traffic. We have Ford, Chevy, and Chrysler, and OF COURSE we have Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Mini-Cooper, Range Rover, Saab (but, curiously, not Volvo), Audi, Porsche, and Jaguar, but if you want to buy the best selling car in America, a Toyota Camry, you have to drive 28 miles through Hamptons traffic to get to the closest dealer. What’s with that?

P.S. – We bought a Toyota Prius today — in Oakdale, not Riverhead. Oil changes are going to be a bear.

Ours is blue.
————————————————————-
Currently listening to: The Luckiest Guy On the Lower East Side by The Magnetic Fields