Sag Hampton

Sag Hampton Rotating Header Image

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted in: Development, Government, Property Rights.

Is There Poverty in the Hamptons?

Oct 15th, 2008
by Saltbox.
1 comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share the Road?

Sep 22nd, 2008
by Saltbox.
5 comments

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted in: Behavior, Transportation.

A Simple Question with No Simple Answer

Sep 14th, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

The other day a candidate for political office who lives in a different part of the Town, asked me to fill her in on issues important to Sag Harbor. Easy…many of these issues are among my daily obsessions: development, preservation of open space, protecting the environment, affordable housing, transportation issues, preserving the “character” of the area, and education. I may have missed one or two; feel free to remind me if I did. Anyway, all was going well until she asked me which one was most important. I opened my mouth to answer, but found I couldn’t decide. Not because I didn’t have an opinion, but because I was suddenly acutely aware — not for the first time — that all these issues are deeply interrelated and interdependent. Given that reality, it seemed to me that singling out any one issue would unfairly shortchange the others.

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.

Posted in: Affodable Housing, Development, Open Space, Transportation.

Knowing When to Say Maybe

Sep 2nd, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

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.

Posted in: Development, Local Businesses.

Blog Action Day, Oct. 15

Aug 23rd, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

Posted in: Blog Stuff, Values.

Save Sag Harbor (Cinema)

Aug 7th, 2008
by Saltbox.
3 comments

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.

Posted in: Development, Historic Preservation, Local Businesses, Our Town.

Not Every Good Idea Is…Well, a Good Idea

Aug 4th, 2008
by Saltbox.
1 comment

Sometimes I get an idea, and at first blush it seems like a world beater. Fortunately, I’m a bit of a procrastinator, so I usually don’t act on these brilliant insights immediately. Usually, over the next few days, I’ll share this idea with friends or colleagues, and they gently (or sometimes not so gently) point out the the things I’ve overlooked, or misunderstood, and suddenly my amazing insight is just road kill, better left by the side of the road.

That’s the way it goes. For every really good idea, there are countless others that are interesting, maybe even exciting, but that just don’t hold up to close scrutiny. Such is the case with the suggestion now being floated in various corners of Sag Harbor that the former Methodist Church building be somehow purchased with Community Preservation Fund (CPF) monies and then used by the John Jermain Memorial Library in some way to relieve that facility’s chronic shortage of space.

The whole concept seems amazingly serendipitous at first glance. The church is around the corner from the library. The church is empty and for sale. The library needs space and is planning on adding space in the near future. The church should be preserved. The CPF was established, in part to preserve historic structures. The Library needs to raise money through a bond issue in order to expand, and the voters have been reluctant to approve such an issue, but the CPF has money; that could be used to buy the church without raising taxes. The library is currently housed in an historic building. The church is also an historic building. It’s perfect!

Or is it?

As it turns out, there are a few problems with this plan, the biggest being that while CPF money can be used to preserve historic structures, that is the limit of what it can be used for with regard to buildings. It cannot, say, be used to adapt historic structures to make them suitable for new uses. Who says so? Mary Wilson, Community Preservation Manager for Southampton Town says so.

Then there is the problem of the church’s suitability for use as a library. Not so suitable as it turns out. The church is in serious disrepair, which is why the Methodist congregation had to leave…and they were just looking at the cost of repairing the existing structure. The library, however, would be looking at a change of use, which would mean not just repairs, but also bringing the building up to current code standards for public spaces. This would be hugely expensive, more expensive, in fact then just building a new building on the piece of property that the library owns down by Mashashimuet Park. Who says this would be more expensive? The library’s architect for one. The library’s previous architect and construction manager said the same thing. Rehabilitation and restoration of historic structures for use by the public is always more expensive than new construction.

Those are two very major issues. Other issues include the fact that the church is a wood-frame structure which raises fire-safety concerns, as well as concerns about the ability of the building’s support structure to bear the weight of the library’s book stacks. Oh, and parking. The current library has none, which is a problem. The church has a few parking spaces, but not nearly enough to address the library’s parking issues. Finally, it should be pointed out that the church’s interior configuration is very unique, spread over several levels that intersect in unusual ways — ways which are not at all consistent with the needs of a library.

So, what we have is a lovely idea, which just doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. And, the truth is, it really didn’t take that much scrutiny to find some serious problems with this idea. More in-depth analysis will undoubtedly turn up more problems, but why bother? There are already enough serious issues to relegate this idea to the good-idea-gone-bad scrap pile. Our library provides many important services to the community. Its need for expanded facilities is serious and well-documented. Those charged with delivering library services to the community cannot afford the time or the expense of pursuing this idea any further. Many of us wish it would have been workable, but it’s not. Time to move on.

Posted in: Historic Preservation, Libraries.

Sag Harbor: Alive, Well and Still Kickin’

Jul 30th, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

Observed in and around Sag Harbor recently:

  • More Priuses per block than perhaps anywhere else in the country;
  • Tibetan Monks running programs at the Unitarian Universalist Church and North Haven Village Hall;
  • Heavy trunout for meetings of the various Village Boards;
  • A rejuvenated public library with more visitors, circulation, programs and joie de vivre than ever;
  • An Alternative Energy Fair at the Whaling Museum, which also seems pretty spry these days;
  • An agressive and effective Greening of Sag Harbor Committee;
  • An agressive and effective Save Sag Harbor group;
  • Our very own (aggressive and effective) Town Councilperson, in the person of Sag Harbor (soon to be Noyac) resident, Anna Throne-Holst;
  • Our very own baseball team;
  • For better or worse (depending on your point of view), a green light for the renovation of the Bulova watchcase factory;
  • A rambunctuous public meeting (or two) of the Sag Harbor School Board at which the community voiced its opinion loudly and clearly, and the Board, in its own way, responded;
  • An activist Village government that is not only trying to protect Sag Harbor’s future, but listens and responds to the concerns of residents and businesses as it goes about its business;
  • The Hamptons Music Festival at the Old Whalers’ Church;
  • The bigger than ever Bay Street Theatre Gala back on Long Wharf;
  • A sparkling new website for our home town newspaper, The Sag Harbor Express;
  • And, under the category of “things never stand still in Sag Harbor” the iconic Sag Harbor Movie Theater is apparently up for sale!!

I sometimes (okay, often) find myself slipping into the role of local curmudgeon here at Sag Hampton, forgetting the qualities that drew me to this town some thirty years ago. So, while Sag Harbor may need “saving” (and I believe it does), it’s good to look around now and then to remember that Sag Harbor is still an exciting and vibrant place to live, work, play and raise a family.

Did I leave out your favorite sign of life in Sag Harbor? Add it in the comments area below.

Posted in: Our Town, Values.

Blog Problems

Jul 29th, 2008
by Saltbox.
Comments are off for this post

For the past few months we’ve been having some problems with our blog hosting company, which seems to be gradually going out of business. Today, with much help from our new blog host Blogharbor.com (nice coincidence, that!) we’re up and running again, so if you’ve been trying to visit Saghampton.com and were consistently getting error messages about “exceeded bandwidth,” rest assured that those days are over (I hope) and that going forward you will be able to access Saghampton.com whenever you wish. Thanks for your patience. I’m glad you’re still reading.

Posted in: Blog Stuff, Dear Reader.

← Earlier Posts
Newer Posts →