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.

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.

A very obvious example of how the important issues we face often intersect is the seeming conflict that exists between open space preservation and the creation of more affordable housing. In a nutshell, that conflict can be stated as every acre of open space that is preserved is an acre of land no longer available as a possible site for affordable housing. One might also say the inverse is true as well: more affordable housing equals less open space. Of course, it’s not that simple. Nothing ever is. The real conflict is not between open space and affordable housing; it’s really between high-end housing and open space. Rarely is affordable housing proposed in an area that is also desirable for preservation. Has anyone heard of a plan to put affordable housing in the farm fields of Sagaponack? Not likely. But those fields are definitely vulnerable to subdivision into lots suitable for a new crop of McMansions. When affordable housing is proposed, which as we all know is not very often, it is almost always in areas that are already well developed, and so not in conflict with open space preservation.

So, all is well, or so it would seem; but this happy little scenario gets turned on its head when viewed from the perspective of the aforementioned “well developed” area. Take for instance, Sag Harbor Village, which is almost at the complete build-out stage. In the Village, open space is at a premium, and many of those who live in the Village would certainly like to see as much as possible of what’s left preserved. So when, as recently happened, the owner of one of the few remaining undeveloped parcels proposes a mixed use development — one that will include both offices and housing — all of it affordable — we are faced with quite a conundrum. Adding to the complication is the fact that the parcel abuts the northern end of the Long Pond Greenbelt, and that it may be part of the migratory range of the endangered Tiger Salamander. So, do we encourage the Town to offer to purchase this property with money from the Community Preservation Fund, or do we encourage the developer to go ahead with his plans to create some desperately needed affordable housing for the community’s police, firefighters, teachers and others in the endangered species known as the middle class?

In my mind that’s a tough call. But, so far, we’ve only examined the intersection of open space preservation and affordable housing. If you thought it was going to be that simple, think again. What about that other major East End headache, traffic? As you undoubtedly already know — unless you never drive in the morning, mid-day, or afternoon — commuting workers are one of, if not the most, significant factor contributing to the congestion on our roads. Why do so many area employees commute to work here? Because, they can’t afford to live here due to a lack of affordable housing. So, it stands to reason that one way to reduce traffic would be to make more affordable housing available in the Sag Hampton area. And, where should this affordable housing be? Well, if we really want to reduce traffic, the housing should be as close as possible to businesses and other major public resources like schools, stores, and professional offices. Ideally this new housing stock would be built within walking or biking distance of the aforementioned community resources, i.e., in hamlet centers like Sag Harbor. All perfectly sensible, unless your priority is to preserve the tiny bit of open space that remains in the Village.

However, if you take a slightly broader perspective, it makes perfect sense to encourage hamlet centers such as Sag Harbor, East and Southampton Villages, and downtown Bridgehampton, among others, to accept both additional housing and businesses, because doing so reduces suburban and commercial sprawl and takes the development pressure off the more pristine outlying areas. This makes sense from a public transportation perspective too, as the more people that live and work in an area, the easier it is to serve those people with public transit. A public bus in Northwest doesn’t make a lot of sense; there just aren’t enough people and businesses there to make it worthwhile. But a bus that serves the Villages of East Hampton, Sag Harbor and Southampton, as well as the hamlets of Wainscott, Bridgehampton and Water Mill (especially if each of those hamlet centers also has some new affordable housing within walking or biking distance of downtown) makes a lot of sense. Buses such as these would not only ease congestion on our roads, but also reduce stresses on the environment such as motor vehicle-created air pollution. And, as we focus more  development in the hamlet centers we reduce the pressure to develop farm fields and wooded areas throughout the East End.

The scenario I’ve just been describing is sometimes known as smart growth. It’s a highly-regarded strategy among planning professionals, but not always so popular among our local politicians. To be fair to the politicians, there are valid reasons for this lack of popularity, including the additional stress on our schools, sewage treatment plants, and other public services that come along with increased density. Unhappily, there’s always a trade-off. Housing affects open space. Open space affects transportation. Transportation affects the environment. Or, looked at another way, housing affects transportation. Transportation affects open space and the environment. Take your pick, or come up with your own formula. The combinations are endless…but not insoluble. The key is to start somewhere. We may not be able to say which of our concerns is the “most” important, but we can acknowledge that it is important to get started working wherever possible.  As we proceed we must pay attention to the collateral impact that any action we take will have in other equally important areas.

So, in the end, I told the candidate that affordable housing was “my issue.” It’s what I care about the most right now. I chose it because it is the most neglected of the major issues confronting Sag Hampton. I also told her I was concerned about the impact any development would have on open space preservation and the character of the Village, as well as being very concerned about threats to the environment. So, while I did pick one issue,  in so doing, I actually picked them all.

As I write this, it’s late, so I’m going to give you the shorthand version of that conversation. The Commuter Connection is similar to the light-rail/feeder bus network proposed by Five Towns Rural Transit (5TRT) as a mass-transit system for our area. 5TRT is an outgrowth of the East End Transportation Council (EETC – dontcha just love acronyms?). EETC commissioned the SEEDS  (Sustainable East End Development Strategies) Study. Boiled down to one important bullet point, SEEDS stated that  you cannot separate regional transportation problems from regional land-use issues (zoning). Get it? No? OK, I’ll elaborate a bit.

In order for mass transit to be successful, you need to have relatively large groups of people who are all moving between the same places — say, from where they live to where they work. That puts the mass in mass transit. If you don’t have these concentrations of people all in one place, than the trains/buses don’t get used, ’cause you can’t lay track to, or put a bus stop at everyone’s front door. Unfortunately, for decades zoning policies in our area have encouraged us to build houses on large plots of land spread around on every buildable acre. At the same time, we’ve encouraged businesses to locate all along our highways and byways, between the hamlets. In general, this type of development is known as suburban sprawl. From a transportation perspective, there’s no there there.

But, the SEEDS study tells us that in order to get people to use mass transit — thus keeping their cars off our over-burdened highways — mass transit has to be convenient. Otherwise, people won’t use it. Duh! So, SEEDS says in order to fix the transportation problem, you need to first address the zoning problem by encouraging a mild increase in hamlet center density,  (through a variety of strategies) while upzoning the areas farthest away from the hamlet centers, so that fewer homes are built in outlying areas. SEEDS also suggests putting an end to strip mall development along our highways, while encouraging “infill” and redevelopment in existing business centers. (Please remember, this is a very simplified explanation of the SEEDS recommendations.) The idea is to make it possible for more people to live and work closer to transportation hubs, so that it’s actually convenient to use mass transit.

That got us talking about Sag Harbor, and more particularly about Bulova, because if you think about our transportation issues, and the solution suggested by SEEDS, then you realize that the place where we should be encouraging more of our workforce to live is in the Village center. But, the Bulova developers are saying we should put our workforce housing somewhere else — not in their development — which just happens to be the largest parcel left anywhere near our hamlet center that’s available for (re)development.  Its location and size makes Bulova the ideal place for workforce housing. Yet knowing all the facts, Village government is sitting on their hands and letting the Bulova developers’ need for financial gain trump both the community’s need for affordable workforce housing and a potential solution to our regional transportation issues. A million+ bucks in a “workforce housing fund” sounds nice, but is beside the point since the donors are dictating that the one place where it actually makes sense to put workforce housing is off limits. This opportunity to address two important regional issues at once won’t come around again.
———————————————————
Currently listening to: Boom Town by Greg Brown.

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.

Many folks said no to the NYS Department of Transportation a few years ago when they proposed a roundabout at the wharf end of Main Street.

CONPOSH (Coalition of Neighborhoods for the Preservation Of Sag Harbor) and others said no to the expansion of 127 Main Street by its former owner, Jon Gruen.

The John Jermain Future Fund said no to the idea of a new library building near Mashashimuet Park.

The Sag Harbor CAC (Citizens Advisory Committee) — of which I am co-chair — tried to say no to the new Bayburger Restaurant opening soon on the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike.

More successfully, the CAC said no to the Reid brothers’ plans to expand their service station to include a full-service car wash, and large parking facility for the use of contractors working locally.

Many in the community, including columnist Tony Brandt and newspaper editor Rick Murphy, would very much like to say no the the Sag Harbor School District’s  budget.

The Water Mill CAC, and the Village of Southampton are attempting to say no to LIPA’s effort to run new power lines on immense 60′ metal poles through the Village and parts of Water Mill and Bridgehampton.

Neighbors tried to say no to Wolffer Vineyard’s effort to erect new workforce housing on Narrow Lane in Bridgehampton, adjacent to the vineyard.

Almost everyone on Long Island, except the mayor of Greenport, wants to say a loud no to Broadwater’s floating Liquid Natural Gas terminal proposed for Long Island Sound.

Many, many people, including County Executive Steve Levy as well as the Southampton Town Board, and East Hampton Village’s powers-that-be are vociferously saying no to any kind of hiring hall or worklink center for day laborers wherever they gather looking for work.

Some folks in Sag Harbor want to say no to the new condominiums proposed for the area at the foot of the North Haven Bridge where the Sag Harbor Professional Building now stands.

Back to Narrow Lane where (the same?) residents said no to a bike lane along their street.

Sag Harbor citizenry said a most definite no to the purchase of two properties adjacent to the High School by the school district.

Barnes and Noble in Bridgehampton? No.

Affordable housing Remsenberg/Speonk? No.

Anti-war protesters in Southampton’s Independence Day Parade? No. (Well maybe, now that the courts have spoken.)

How about expanding Sunrise Highway all the way to the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike so that then-Governor Hugh Carey could get to his summer home on Shelter Island more easily? No. (Alright, that was a really dumb idea.)

A nuclear reactor in Shoreham? No way. (Yeah, that one was pretty dumb too.)

I could go on. I seem to have an almost photographic memory for ideas and projects that were shot down by community activists and/or local government. Frankly, I was one of the community activists expressing my disapproval in many (but not all) of the aforementioned instances. While I don’t regret my involvement in those issues, the cumulative weight of all those “nos” has got me thinking that I’m really tired of saying no. I’ve reached the point where I just want to say YES to something. Yes, Yes and Yes. And I’m going to start right now.

I say yes to Mike and Pat Trunzo’s proposal to create a mixed-use affordable housing/office development on their property on the Turnpike.

Yes to Five Towns Rural Transits’ efforts to create a light-rail and bus network here on the East End.

Yes to a new and/or expanded Library, wherever it may be located.

Yes to the Sag Harbor Village zoning code overhaul, and the Mayor’s and Trustees’ efforts to create more opportunities for affordable housing in the village…and yes to accessory apartments.

Yes to cops and cones on County Road 39, whatever the hell it costs.

Yes to more bike lanes, sidewalks and safer routes for kids walking and biking to school.

And finally, yes to acknowledging our common humanity and kinship to each other; to treating all people with dignity and respect; and so, yes to providing safe places where people who want to do needed work can find the work they need to do to support themselves and their families.
———————————————————-
Currently listening to: Long-Forgotten Fairytale by The Magnetic Fields

Powered by ScribeFire.

Meanwhile, here’s the good:

1. Sag Harbor Mayor Greg Ferraris and Trustee Tiffany Scarlatto have been working diligently on a plan to encourage affordable workforce housing in the Village of Sag Harbor. They’ve recently shown a draft of the plan to the other Trustees, and the press. I’ve seen a copy of the document and I believe that it is well intentioned, well reasoned and has a good chance of actually achieving the results at which it is aiming. Three cheers for local leaders who are not afraid to tackle the tough issues.
2. The Planning Department of the Town of Southampton has agreed to undertake a study of the area along both sides of the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike between Sag Harbor Industries and the Village Line. They agreed to this study due to the sudden onslaught of development in this area, and the potential for a great deal more. If development is left unchecked, Sag Harbor could find itself with an unplanned, and unappealing commercial strip at the southern gateway to the village. Neither Mayor Ferraris nor Southampton Supervisor Heaney see this as a desirable outcome, and so both are committing some resources to a study that hopefully will result in somewhat less development in this area than would be allowed under current zoning.
3. The two “building” subcommittees of the John Jermain Memorial Library’s Library Development Committee (LDC) met with Southampton Public Transportation and Safety Director Tom Neely in a proactive attempt to tackle potential problems related to traffic, parking, safety, pedestrian and bicycle access and mass transit at the proposed site of the new library building at Mashashimuet Park. Mr. Neely was quick to point out that the library location is at the southern gateway to Sag Harbor (yes, we’re talking about the same gateway), and that appropriate development of gateways between less developed and more developed areas is one of the key concepts of the recently completed SEEDS (Sustainable East End Development Strategies) study. As such, he reasoned, State and or other grant monies ought to be available for studies of and subsequent improvements to the gateway area. He’s going to take it up with the East End Transportation Council, which is anxious to put the SEEDS recommendations to the test. This could be a win-win for the library, the park, Sag Harbor and the entire East End.
4. Speaking of the library, the work of the LDC continues to move ahead with due deliberation. An RFP (Request for Proposal) has been written by the multi-talented Alison Cornish (with help from others), to enable the Library Trustees to choose an architect specializing in preservation and restoration of historic buildings. This architect will be charged with coming up with a plan that will encompass both the restoration of the library’s existing building, and the updating of its systems, allowing it to function as both a community centerpiece and a usable public building well into the future.
5. The intrepid Bryan Boyhan, editor and publisher of the Sag Harbor Express has made it his business to ensure that Sag Harbor has a proper 300th anniversary celebration in 2007. (I know the date is in dispute; get over it) He’s organized  a large committee consisting of representatives from almost all of Sag Harbor’s community organizations, and he’s pushing them mercilessly to put together a five-month long program of events, exhibits and performances commemorating Sag Harbor’s multi-faceted history. If all goes as planned, 2007 will be a fun year indeed, for residents and visitors alike.
6. The holiday light-up on Main Street looks better than ever this year. (Sorry, my camera’s broken, or there’d be a photo.)

So, that’s the list, or most of it. I’m sure there’s more, but this post is getting rather lengthy, so I’ll stop for now. I’m feeling better anyway. It’s always good to remember some of the things we have to be thankful for. The feelings of good cheer thus engendered should carry me through the holidays. Time enough then to think about why things may not all be quite so rosy as they at first seem.

In the meantime, have a very happy and safe holiday season!

Coming from North Haven, the stretch of Ferry Road from the roundabout to the bridge, including the bridge itself, is considered the gateway area. This is a truly lovely way to approach the Harbor with both elegant estates and water views all along the way. Happily, it is unlikely that there will be substantial changes to this gateway in the foreseeable future.

On Route 114, the gateway was previously a little vague, but thanks to the recent efforts of some local community groups and the State Dept. of Transportation, the beginning of the gateway is now clearly marked by an attractive oval sign welcoming you to the Village. In addition, the DOT added a small island in the middle of the road, as well as sidewalks and a bike lane to let drivers know that they are entering a populated area and should slow down. That stretch along Rt. 114 is almost completely residential, and the transition from the mainly wooded area leading up to the gateway to the Village’s heavily commercial downtown is both gradual and graceful. This gateway too, is not likely to see major changes anytime soon.

That leaves the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike, which I will henceforth refer to by its shorter (and easier-to-type) name, CR 79. (CR stands for County Road.) This gateway, which runs approximately from the transfer station to Otter Pond, is a bit more problematic. For one thing, it currently supports a mixture of uses — everything from undeveloped land, to a factory, with some houses and other businesses thrown in for good measure. There’s also a lovely view of a pond that is part of the Long Pond Greenbelt, which runs parallel to and just east of the road. The zoning here is something of a crazy-quilt, with everything from highway business to various residential configurations side by side with little rhyme or reason.

In addition, on this long straight road with few interrupting cross streets, cars tend to pick up speed from Scuttlehole Road and come flying around the curve before the park, where the speed limit suddenly drops to 25 mph without much warning. Unlike Rt. 114, drivers on CR 79 aren’t given any clues that they’re entering a more densely populated and intensively used area until they’re suddenly in the middle of it. As a gateway to our charming, historic and heavily used Village, this area is in need of some serious rethinking.

From a transportation standpoint, a gateway should provide drivers with lots of visual cues that they are entering a more populated area so they can slow down and be more watchful for the unexpected. Sidewalks, bike lanes, narrower driving lanes, crosswalks, on-street parallel parking, and signage are all ways to  accomplish this goal. In terms of development along the road, the ideal mix would probably fill around the existing businesses with various types of residential development and other low-impact commercial establishments such as Bed and Breakfasts or offices, maybe with apartments above. Perhaps, some open space would be preserved as well. Unfortunately, the current highway business zoning allows for a very different type of development that could include lumber yards and car dealerships — not the sort of things one would hope to see lining the main road into the village and just down the block from the park.

Fortunately, a coalition of civic groups has prevailed upon the Town of Southampton to undertake a study of this area before full development under current zoning turns it into another County Road 39. And there’s more good news. Sag Harbor’s forward-looking Mayor, Greg Ferraris, wants to extend this study right up to Jermain Avenue, and is working closely with the Town to make this happen.

This is where you come in. Once again, you have an easy opportunity to be a local hero. The Town’s chief planner, Jefferson Murphree, has indicated that his department will be looking for input from the community once they begin work on their study. So, if you have suggestions as to what should be done to make the gateway safer and to ensure that it retains the flavor and character of the Village for which it serves as an entrance, please speak up.

There are many ways to be heard on this issue. I’ll list a few of them:

• Write a letter to the Planning Department of Southampton Town;
• Write a letter to the Mayor of Sag Harbor;
• Write a letter to the Editor of the Sag Harbor Express;
• Attend a Sag Harbor CAC (Citizens Advisory Committee) meeting;
• Attend a CONPOSH (Coalition of Neighborhoods to Preserve Sag Harbor) meeting.
• If your concerns are mainly about traffic on CR 79, you can also write to County Legislator Jay Schneiderman who is the chairman of the Legislature’s Public Works Committee.

Of course, if you like the look of County Road 39 in Southampton, and don’t mind increased traffic (and the accidents that come with it), you can just sit back and wait. It’ll all be here before you know it.

The extremely well conceived section on “Site Access and Traffic Calming” directly refers to Ken’s efforts to move this program forward, in addition to putting forward a few ideas of its own. Today I found a comment in that section by Sag Harborite Jonas Hagen who has apparently put in some time reading the report. In a nutshell, he praised the traffic calming ideas put forth by the committee, and suggests that those ideas get implemented immediately. Reading his comment, I had one of those moments where you just marvel at how clearly the path is marked once someone shows it to you. Jonas, I agree, and I know Ken Dorph would too. Rather than reiterate all the points the CLC makes, I’m giving you a link to the orignal. Just click here. Jonas’ comment is down at the bottom of the page.

These are really sound ideas, in line with similar ideas previously put forth by CONPOSH, (Coalition of Neighborhoods for the Preservation of Sag Harbor), The EETC (East End Transportation Council),
the NYS Department of Transportation, and the Safe Routes to School Program, mentioned above. There’s absolutely no need to wait for work to commence on the library (old or new) before making it safer to walk, drive and bike in our community.

Why isn’t there a sidewalk along the Main Street side of Mashashimuet Park? Why do the Village and Park Board still allow that dangerous head-in parking next to the children’s playground? Why aren’t there more crosswalks, and “yield to pedestrian” signs in the historic triangle area? That area also cries out for such traffic calming devices as bump-outs, designated parking spots, and better road striping. Why not a bike lane down Main Street that goes right into and through Mashashimuet Park connecting the old library and the new one? There’s absolutely no reason why work can’t begin on some or all of these projects right now.

By the way, Jonas, you’re wrong about the library. Let’s talk.