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.

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.

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

Powered by ScribeFire.

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.

Powered by ScribeFire.

In a way though, it was a good thing that I left them off the list, because now I can write about them today, without feeling that I’m plugging one business too often. For those of my readers who haven’t been to Sag Hampton, let me describe Conca d’Oro. In appearance and menu it is a typical Italian-American restaurant/pizzeria. There’s one long, narrow room, with pizza ovens and a counter on the left, and a seating area on the right. Except at the front, by the street-side windows, it’s pretty dark. In the back, where it’s darkest, there’s a separate seating area with candles in wine bottles for those wanting to be waited upon. Design features are minimal — a few posters and chianti bottles, and fake plants about covers it.

But, it’s not the decor that draws the crowds, and crowds there be. It’s the food, and the friendly atmosphere. As I mentioned, the menu is fairly typical for restaurants of this type, with the mainstays being pizza, hot and cold hero sandwiches, plus the usual assortment of red-sauced dinner entrees: veal, chicken and eggplant parmigiana, manicotti, ravioli and other pasta dishes, with or without meat, and a few house specials. And, while I could riff on the pleasures of dining in a neighborhood hangout, where you’ll always run into several folks you know, today I want to focus on that seemingly ordinary food, ’cause a recent experience at another Italian dining establishment has made me much more appreciative of what Conca d’Oro has to offer.

A couple of weeks ago, my wife and I, and another couple went to the annual orchid show at the New York Botanical Garden in the Bronx (spectacular — more than worth the trip, and the hefty entrance fee). Those of you who’ve been to the Botanical Garden or the nearby Bronx Zoo may know that both of these institutions are only a few blocks away from the Bronx’s Little Italy, also known as Arthur Avenue. I only discovered this fact recently, when I heard Arthur Avenue being praised for its fabulous “real” Italian restaurants. Prime among these was Dominick’s.

Since our trip would stretch over two mealtimes, we decided that for one of those we’d dine in Little Italy. We didn’t plan on eating at Dominick’s though, because we’d heard that it was very popular, with waits of up to two hours to get in. Instead, we picked another eatery – also highly rated, but not quite as popular as Domminck’s. Our plan was to have lunch there, but we arrived a bit early and our chosen restaurant was not yet open. Being on somewhat of a tight schedule, we couldn’t wait, and so set off down Arthur Avenue hoping to find some good Italian home cooking. After passing by several establishments, also closed, we found ourselves outside Dominick’s, and although they didn’t officially open for another half hour, a waiter waved us in, so in we went.

The good news was that since they weren’t yet officially open, there was no wait.  There’s also, no menu, no checks, and no private tables. All seating at Dominick’s is family style. While you cozy up to the new friends seated at your table, the waiter recites the various dishes that are available for each course. You have to pay close attention, as the list is quite long. No prices are mentioned. I guess you could ask, but that would take some of the fun out of the experience. So, you order, and hope you’ve got enough cash to cover what you’ve eaten ’cause they don’t take credit cards. While it may not sound like it, it was a lot of fun. As the various dishes we ordered arrived, we watched Dominick’s fill up with the most amazing assortment of New York characters I’ve ever seen — and I’ve lived in New York. It was like a casting call for a movie about the Bronx. On top of that, almost everyone seemed to know each other, not unlike our experience when eating locally at Conca d’Oro. By the time we’d finished our meal, there was indeed a long line of people waiting for tables.

So that was the good part. The highly praised, authentic Italian cuisine, on the other hand – not so much. It wasn’t bad, exactly, just disappointing. I won’t bore you with the details. We skipped dessert and escaped with a bill of $58.00 for four, which our waiter delivered verbally. Not a rip off, and we did have a good time, so, all-in-all, a mostly positive experience.

Yet — and here’s the good news for all you Sag Hampton residents — gustatorialy, Dominick’s was no Conca d’Oro. While not haute cuisine, the food at Conca d’oro is consistently good, and quite a bit better than what we had at the Bronx’s best “authentic” Italian restaurant. Score one for Sag Hampton, and thank you Conca d’Oro for continuing to provide Italian food-loving Sag Hamptonites with a reasonably-priced, casual alternative for very tasty family dining. By the way, I highly recommend the eggplant parmigiana, and did I mention how great the orchid show was? Here are a couple of photos I took there:

Currently listening to: Long Island Shores by Mindy Smith

The only shortcoming I see is that not enough merchants participate. One merchant who sort of participated, put up a sign saying “Sidewalk Sale Inside.” Is it possible to miss the point more wildly than that? It’s not the sale; it’s the sidewalk. OK, maybe for some, it’s the sale. And, I admit to buying a few things last year and this because they were on sale, but it’s the sociable feel of an open-air market that is the sidewalk sale’s main attraction to me, and, I suspect, to many others.

It was so much fun to see the streets full of people walking, talking, and browsing through the merchandise while enjoying the bright sun and mild temperatures of a near-perfect fall day. On the sidewalk, dedicated shoppers indulged their passion without having to forsake the sunshine that warmed their backs, or the company of their less acquisitive friends and family. Equally pleasant was the fact that while bustling, the village was not mobbed, and the intensity of the summer crowds was not evident, in the more relaxed autumn atmosphere. Even the few exceptions — for example, a woman, who noticed me admiring a clock at In Home, and quickly snatched it up the moment I turned to ask my wife if she liked it, or a man at Sylvester’s who just couldn’t wait for me to finish looking through the CDs — were just typical of shoppers everywhere, and not really offensive. (Turns out my wife didn’t really like the clock anyway.)

The sidewalk sale is both welcoming and unpretentious, which just about epitomizes what I think is best about Sag Harbor. We’re still just a small town when we want to be, but one that encourages visitors to share in our bounty.

So, I would like to offer a warm thank you to the merchants of Sag Harbor who participated in the sidewalk sale; especially those who actually had merchandise on the sidewalk. You made my day. To those who didn’t participate this year, a request:  please get with the program. As nice as this event was, it would be even better if more merchants actively participated.

On a local level, however, an individual or small group can still have an impact. If the Village or Town government is doing something you don’t agree with, or that just doesn’t make sense, there’s a good chance they’ll listen if you point out the error of their ways. One group of which I am a member, the Sag Harbor Citizens Advisory Committee to Southampton Town has had some small sucess at influencing some recent developments in just this way.

But today I’d like to talk about one effort that didn’t work out quite so well. As you probably already know, a new restaurant will soon be opening at the site of the old Gingerbread Bake Shop on the Sag Harbor-Bridgehampton Turnpike. When the plans for the new establishment, which will be called Bayburger, were presented to the Town Planning Board, we, the CAC, had some concerns, which we brought to the Planning Board’s attention through letters and direct testimony. We were concerned, and still are, that the size and scope of the Bayburger proposal was out of scale with the intended location.

In the 1970s, as long-time residents of the area will tell you, that spot on the Turnpike was  home to a small, low-impact,  fast-food restaurant called The Whaleburger which did primarily take-out business. The Whaleburger had, at most, six indoor seats, no outdoor dining and a drive-thru window that no one is sure was legal. Although there were never more than a handful of cars parked there, Whaleburger went ahead and paved their entire property to within ten feet of the neighboring private houses, which was permissable under the zoning regulations at that time.

Now jump ahead thirty years and we find that since the property was once used as a restaurant current law says that Bayburger is an “in kind” use and the only zoning laws that apply to it are the ones that were in effect in the 1970’s. This, even though instead of six seats, Bayburger will have 90 inside, plus a 40-seat outdoor dining area. In addition, there will be a large, brightly lit parking lot, and a drive-thru window for ice cream sales. The proposed parking lot will extend to within ten feet of neighboring homes, and will have no fence or tall shrubs to screen the restaurant from its neighbors. The proposed hours of operation are to be 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Liquor sales are a possibility. Although the new owners won’t say if they’ve applied for a liquor license, they also won’t say it’s out of the question. This is not your father’s Whaleburger.

The CAC, and many other groups and individuals, believe that, if allowed to go through as proposed, Bayburger will exacerbate the steadily growing traffic problems in the area, create noise and lighting problems for its residential neighbors, and have a detrimental impact on the character of the area. We made specific requests of the Planning Board to bring pressure on the developers to modify their plans for the seating, lighting, parking lot, outdoor dining area and the take out window. In the end, though, we were ignored. Minor changes were made to the number of outdoor seats and the height of the lights in the parking lot. Otherwise the Bayburger application flew through the Planning Board approval process as if it was preordained. The Southampton Press reports that at the end of the process “[Chairperson] Finnerty, pointing out that all major issues had been resolved, indicated that the board would grant preliminary approval for the application at its [next] meeting.” I’d certainly like to know what those major issues were that the board so effectively wrapped up, because exactly none of the issues that the CAC brought to the boards’ attention were resolved to our satisfaction.

I think it’s important to mention here, though, that things don’t always go this way. The Planning Board did respond to public input recently when it took a principled stand in the case of the car wash proposed by the Reid Brothers, just a short distance away from Bayburger on the Turnpike. In that instance they ruled that that proposal required a SEQRA Type 1 environmental impact statement, which may greatly change what is ultimately built at that location. So, the question arises, why did the Planning Board stand firm in the case of the Reid Brothers application, yet roll-over for Bayburger?

I believe the answer is that they were afraid that if they got tough with Bayburger they would be sued by the developer. In the case of the Reid proposal, they were on much stronger ground, legally speaking, and were following the advice of the Town’s own planning department. On the other hand, with Bayburger, the law — specifically the law that said that a restaurant use was “grandfathered in” for that location — was leaning in the developer’s favor. Fearing a lawsuit, the board was unwilling to push too hard for even some common sense restrictions, like increasing the size of the buffer zone between the restaurant’s parking lot and its residential neighbors.

So, given the laws they have to work with, the Planning Board’s unwillingness to come down harder on the owners of Bayburger while unfortunate, is understandable. However, it does point up a shortcoming of the existing laws governing this situation. I’m not opposed to the idea of “grandfathering”  businesses in the location where they have been doing business when the zoning in that area changes. That’s right and fair. But, Bayburger is of a different ilk because:

• the current owners did not own the property when the zoning was changed;
• the property in question has not been in continuous use as a restaurant since the zoning change, and,
• the restaurant they propose to open is of a completely different size and scale from the one that pre-existed the zoning change.

These circumstances should have a mitigating effect on whether or not a business is considered “grandfathered”  under our zoning laws, but they don’t. That our recommendations were ignored by the Planning Board was distressing. That Bayburger, and others are able to exploit a loophole in an otherwise useful law, thereby creating a virtual “anything goes” zoning situation for themselves, is entirely unacceptable. The loophole needs to be plugged as quickly and effectively as possible.

I’ve heard some grumbling on the street about the new Golden Pear coffee shop in town. Some folks are feeling put out at having lost a local hangout when the Harbor Deli closed up shop. I’ve also heard a few people refer to the Golden Pear as a chain restaurant, with all the negative baggage that implies. Well, I do hate to see yet another one of Sag Harbor’s unique mix of homey shops disappear and be replaced by something more generically Hamptons, which is certainly how you would describe the Golden Pear. But, to call the Golden Pear a chain restaurant, implying that it is somehow akin to Appleby’s, Subway or Starbucks is a little over the top. Generic as it is in design and offerings, the Golden Pear is only a small locally-owned chain, whose reach does not extend beyond the Hamptons (although some would argue that their Westhampton branch — being west of the canal — is not actually in the Hamptons). So, while I miss the Harbor Deli, and wish it had been sold to someone who would have retained its local hometown flavor — including the dining area where many locals enjoyed whiling away an afternoon — I do not see the Golden Pear as the first incursion of a “chain” restaurant into Sag Harbor; paving the way for Outback Steakhouse. I say let’s give it a chance to become a part of the community.

However — and here’s where the ambivalence comes in — in the spirit of giving it a chance, I recently bought a medium coffee and a buttered bagel for myself, and a small coffee for a friend, and the tab came to $6.14 (including tax). That’s an incursion of a different kind, and I don’t like it one bit. The same items purchased at the bakery in Schiavoni’s IGA would cost approximately $4.00. If the Golden Pear wants to attract local patrons, then they can’t be charging absurd Hamptonesque prices. So, I’m of two minds about the Golden Pear; I want to give them a chance, but given their prices, I won’t be able to afford to do so. Will you?

Update: This morning (6/25/06) my wife and I had breakfast at Panera Bread, the local outpost of a national chain that has recently opened at the Bridgehampton Commons. While the look of the place is pretty much what you’d expect from a chain restaurant (plastic attractive), the food (at least what we ate) was above average and the prices were low. We had a large coffee with unlimited refills, a bagel with cream cheese, a muffin, and a small fruit cup; total cost: $7.88 (including tax). Please don’t make the mistake of thinking that I’m saying low prices = good; high prices = bad. If that were true, I’d shop at Walmart, which I won’t. However, I do believe that protectionist impulses (such as keeping national chains off Main Street) must be tempered by the knowledge that it is often only those national chains that offer goods and services at prices affordable to the working people who keep this area functioning. So, while the  second-palace owners  think nothing of dropping $6.14 at the Golden Pear for  two coffees and a bagel, the rest of us will be breakfasting at Panera Bread (at least until GP wises up).