July 17, 2005
South Fork, Hamptons estate agents
House prices keep leaping upward, especially on the South Fork,
where the median price in the first quarter of 2005 surpassed
$700,000, according to Long Island Profiles, a Bay Shore company
that tracks the real estate market. The supply of properties for
sale for $1 million or more seems to be expanding exponentially.
And so is the number of people on a quest for the Holy Grail: the
sales commission on a multimillion-dollar house.
The math is seductive: The ordinary commission, 6 percent of the sale
price, amounts to $60,000 on a $1 million house. Sell just five of
those a year as exclusive listings, and you are talking $300,000 in
gross income. Close a deal on a single $12 million estate - there are
several on the market at the moment - and the potential payoff is a
dizzying $720,000.
That's why the South Fork - one of the country's hottest real estate
markets, with prices rising at double-digit rates every year - now has
more agents and brokers than ever before. Large companies like the
Corcoran Group, Prudential Douglas Elliman and Sotheby's have added
scores of sales people in the Hamptons over the last five years, and
locally owned offices are merging and expanding to compete with the
big names.
Although the rest of Long Island has also seen double-digit growth,
the first-quarter median house price for Nassau and Suffolk was
$447,700, much less than the $700,000-plus on the South Fork.
[NYT]
Posted by omor at 07:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 04, 2005
Ferry, North Fork / Orient to New London, CT
Year-round passenger and car ferry from Orient / North Fork,
Long Island to New London, CT.
Ferry status: running, delayed, cancelled due to hurricaine ?
For pedestrian safety, build the pedestrian bridge at the
New London, CT ferry terminal.
Posted by omor at 10:39 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 10, 2005
Peconic Bay Regional Transportation Authority
Two Tracks Converge
2005 January 09, By JOHN RATHER, The New York Times
AN unusual convergence of events may be opening a way for a
top-to-bottom refashioning of public transportation on the East End,
where traffic snarls and Hamptons summer gridlock have brought cries
for years for something to be done, but where local opposition to new
or wider roads remains fierce.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, already increasing fares
and reducing service for the new year to close budget deficits, wants
to raise an additional $1 billion by selling or leasing properties
including parking lots, train yards and stations.
On the East End, some elected officials and groups want to explore
creating an East End transportation authority that would buy or lease
the Long Island Rail Road tracks that run along the North and South
Forks, transforming them into the arteries of a new light rail and
shuttle bus transit system.
Some of the basic ingredients for a future deal seem to be there. But
the five towns and nine villages that make up the East End would need
to agree first on a common course of action, and the authority, which
owns the L.I.R.R., would need to be persuaded that are financial
advantages to ceding control of the railroad's eastern extremities.
Even the most optimistic of East End transportation advocates agreed
that making all that happen would take some doing, but several of them
indicated that they were poised to give it a try.
"The M.T.A. certainly isn't winning any awards for how they are
running the system out here," said Hank de Cillia of Bridgehampton, a
spokesman for a private advocacy group called the Five Town Rural
Transit Committee. "One of our arguments to them would be that we are
an insignificant, tiny little part of their empire, and we think we
could run it better."
(Thomas R. Suozzi, the Nassau County executive, also has designs on
parts of the L.I.R.R. track system, having proposed a mass transit
light rail loop for the Hub area in central Nassau that would
incorporate the railroad's Oyster Bay and West Hempstead lines. But
the plan is tentative and financing is nowhere near being secured.)
Tom Kelly, an M.T.A. spokesman, said he had not even heard of the
proposed East End authority and could not comment on whether the
M.T.A. would consider lease or sale of East End tracks. "This is not
something we have explored," he said. "I won't say its premature, I
just don't know the legality of it. It might not be feasible." The
Long Island Rail Road public affairs office, informed of the proposal,
did not offer any comment.
But legislation to create an East End transit authority has already
been introduced in Albany. Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr., a
Republican from Sag Harbor, wrote a bill last year to create what
would be called the Peconic Bay Regional Transportation Authority. It
would cover the towns of Southampton, East Hampton, Shelter Island,
Riverhead and Southold, and the nine villages within them.
The bill did not come to a vote, but Mr. Thiele said he would
reintroduce it this month. He said he believed that East End officials
supported the plan, but added that he had not discussed the proposal
with M.T.A. or Long Island Rail Road officials.
"We have certainly talked to the M.T.A. about the type of service they
provide now, and quite frankly it has been their lack of
responsiveness that has resulted in this," he said.
Mr. de Cillia's group visualizes one-, two- or three-car self-powered
trains running half-hourly on North and South Fork routes, supported
by shuttle buses waiting at the stations to carry riders to or near
their final destinations. This, Mr. de Cillia said, would be a better
way to run a railroad in an area with 29 percent of Long Island's area
but less than 5 percent of its year-round residents.
Currently the L.I.R.R. serves the North Fork with two eastbound and
three westbound trains weekdays and two round trips on weekends
connecting Greenport and Pennsylvania Station. There is also one round
trip connecting Riverhead and Pennsylvania Station on weekdays. On the
South Fork, the railroad runs five westbound and six eastbound trains
on weekdays except on Friday, when there is a seventh eastbound train.
On weekends there are five eastbound and four westbound trains.
The East End plan also envisions small-scale, primarily seasonal ferry
and water taxi service with bus and rail links. Routes might include
service between Orient Point and hamlets on the North and South Forks.
The Cross Sound Ferry Company carries passengers and vehicles between
Orient Point and New London, Conn.
The group contends that its proposal would avert further surrender to
cars and roads while serving residents, visitors and second
homeowners. Its advocates say it would accommodate freight trains in
off-hours, connect seamlessly with the Long Island Rail Road and carry
tradespeople to reduce the daily "trade parade" that East End
residents blame for congesting roads, particularly on the South Fork.
The group said tradespeople could initially drive their vehicles to
secure parking locations near job sites and then travel to and from
the locations by rail. They point out that many commuters to the East
End work in restaurants, schools and area hospitals and had no need to
travel with tools and heavy equipment.
Mr. de Cillia, a business consultant, said the group had been
concerned more with what had to be than on how to do it, but
recognized that creation of the new transportation authority might be
necessary.
Southampton voted on Dec. 17 to make exploring an authority a part of
the town's master plan. "This is really where our focus is," said
Steve Kenny, a Southampton councilman. "What we would really like to
see now is the M.T.A. coming to the table."
Mr. Thiele said a bill that created a new authority for the explicit
purpose of immediately replacing the M.T.A. on the East End would have
slim chance of passage. "That's probably an uphill battle," he said.
But he said chances were far better for establishing a new authority
that would work cooperatively with the M.T.A. He said the new
authority could be financed by what he said was a fair share of fares
and money the East End paid in sales taxes, mortgage taxes and a
number of other taxes to the M.T.A.
"From the research we've done so far it appears that when it comes to
the M.T.A. the East End is definitely a creditor nation," he said. "If
we had our fair share, we believe a train and shuttle bus service
could be covered."
Mr. de Cillia's group estimated that East End residents, second
homeowners and visitors accounted for $40 million in revenues routed
to existing rail and bus service. The group said the amount far
exceeded what the East End got back in services, but made no estimate
of the difference.
A state-created authority would have the power to sell tax-exempt
bonds to finance its operations and buy M.T.A. assets and new
equipment. But backers of the new authority said large-scale borrowing
was not part of their plan.
Instead, they spoke of securing federal financing for new light rail
cars and exploring the possibility of leasing tracks. Mr. de Cillia
said the M.T.A. might even agree to cede the tracks to the new
authority.
Mr. Thiele said the M.T.A.'s announced interest in selling or leasing
assets might be a sign the time was right for significant changes. "We
may be underestimating this thing," he said. "Maybe the M.T.A. would
be glad to let someone else take over."
Whether towns and villages could reach agreement would be another
matter. Some are currently at odds over transportation issues.
Southold is suing East Hampton in federal court in an effort to knock
down East Hampton ordinances that ban car-and-driver ferries and limit
passenger ferries. Southold and Shelter Island, which has joined in
the action, contend that they are being victimized by traffic to and
from the Cross Sound Ferry terminal in Orient and points on the South
Fork.
Joshua Y. Horton, the Southold supervisor, said it was unfair for East
Hampton to bar ferries that could relieve traffic problems on the
North Fork and Shelter Island. "That is the transportation issue that
needs to be addressed," he said.
East Hampton, meanwhile, would be the terminus of a new limited-access
highway built along the Long Island Rail Road tracks that is proposed
for further study in the transportation plan the Southampton town
board added to the town's master plan on Dec. 17.
The road, which Southampton officials concede would be unlikely to be
built, would begin at the eastern end of County Road 39 in Southampton
and end at the East Hampton town line near the East Hampton Airport.
William McGintee, the East Hampton town supervisor, said Southampton
officials had given assurances that no road along the railroad would
be built without his town's consent. "Any plan for that is not worth
the paper it's written on without East Hampton agreeing," he said.
Mr. McGintee said he was more favorably disposed toward an East End
transportation authority. "It is an interesting concept," he said.
But North Fork officials had questions. "I am certainly not a naysayer
in regard to enhanced transportation," Mr. Horton said. "But I am not
sure a new authority with brand-new bonding authority is the answer to
that. There are agencies already in place, and we should be fighting
to have better representation and service from those agencies."
The Greenport mayor, David Kapell, said he had heard what he described
as "loose talk" about an authority. "I don't place much credence in
that," he said. "Whether or not an authority is a viable alternative
is a very complicated issue."
"In my opinion, smaller units of government do not operate efficiently
from an economy standpoint," Mr. Kapell said. "It's hard for me to
understand how you could create a smaller authority that people could
afford to pay for. The problem is one of economics."
The five towns and nine villages are part of a $500,000 federally
financed initiative to find a regional consensus on transportation and
land use. If a consensus were reached, it would target county, state
and federal financing for transportation.
The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council began the initative,
known as the Sustainable East End Development Strategies, or Seeds,
program, in 2001. Other participants include the M.T.A., the Long
Island Rail Road and state and Suffolk County transportation agencies.
Gerry Bogacz, a planning group director in Manhattan for the council,
said the initiative would not weigh directly on the question of
whether a new transportation authority was warranted. "Seeds is trying
to build a consensus on what needs to be done," he said. "Once that
consensus is reached, it's a question of how do you implement that
consensus."
Some local officials said the initiative had taken so long they
doubted it would yield useful results. But a wealth of statistical
information compiled by Seeds about a range of transportation options
will be available soon.
Patricia Thiele of Sag Harbor, the Seeds coordinator, said data from
computer modeling of transportation alternatives would be released in
April. Ms. Thiele, who is not related to Assemblyman Thiele, said
alternatives studied included road widenings, new roads, increased
rail and ferry service and different types of services.
Mr. de Cillia, who took part in the initiative, said he had reviewed
some of the results. "I have seen enough to know that if you make more
investment in transit you are going to get more riders," he said.
Mr. Bogacz said the results could help lead to an inter-municipal
agreement in 2006. "The data will hopefully tell a story that people
will be able to read," he said.
Previously: Expanded rail service on the South Fork needed, MTA shortchanges
eastern Long Island.
Posted by omor at 04:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 09, 2004
Expanded rail service on the South Fork needed
EDITORIALS
Easthampton Star, 2004 Sept 09
Save the L.I.R.R.
Given the level of service provided on the South Fork by the Long
Island Rail Road, a good argument might be made in favor of tearing up
the tracks and replacing them with a new road (dare we say bypass?)
from near Southampton Village at least to the East Hampton Town line.
Riders, or, perhaps more accurately, would-be riders, have for many
years complained about a schedule that seemed more about moving the
rail cars from one place to another than serving passengers' needs,
particularly on westbound runs. But abandoning rail would make us more
dependent on automobiles at a time when transportation alternatives
should be promoted. Doing away with trains would be a major step
backward.
The idea of tearing up the tracks, if it has been proposed as a way of
getting the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's attention, is a
risky gamble. The M.T.A. might just take the South Fork up on it. The
L.I.R.R. seems to have given up on serving the South Fork villages and
hamlets in a meaningful way a while ago. When new passenger cars were
added a few years ago they were chosen with commuters in mind, not
people bringing luggage for a weekend. There's room for a briefcase on
racks above passengers' heads, but not much else. The Friday trains
out of New York City take on the frantic air of a hurricane
evacuation, as riders try to cram their bags and sports equipment into
whatever space they can find.
As proposed in a study commissioned by the Southampton Town Board,
rail service would end at the Southampton train station; buses would
take passengers the rest of the way to Montauk. A new transfer
facility, more like cattle pens than the "visitor center" mentioned in
the study, would accommodate the up to 1,500 passengers per trip as
they are herded onto buses. The consultant who wrote up the study's
findings said that buses would actually serve riders better, by being
able to take them to places like Sag Harbor, for instance, which are
now inaccessible by train.
A more sensible proposal in the study is for expanded rail service on
the South Fork. Trains would run more frequently and shuttle buses or
"light-rail" trains would go to the now unserved hamlets and villages.
People close to the issue say, however, that the Metropolitan
Transportation Authority would not be enthusiastic about this
prospect.
The idea of doing away with rail service would seem to be
counterintuitive for Southampton Town officials, who have made a
mantra of complaints about vehicles headed for destinations in East
Hampton Town. The consultant said that about 10,600 vehicles a day
that cross the Shinnecock Canal on County Road 39 during the summer
are bound for East Hampton. Eliminating rail service east of
Southampton Village would only cause that number to grow as more
people chose personal cars over complex and time-consuming public
transportation.
In East Hampton, replacing the rail bed with a road would seem all but
impossible; the tracks bisect the village. Nor would there be much
space in many locations for a second set of tracks, as might be
required for light-rail service, without the condemnation of numerous
houses. Another unfortunate result would be along the long stretch of
Hither Hills State Park where the L.I.R.R. rails now run. A highway
there seems unthinkable.
State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has proposed legislation to
create a Peconic Bay regional authority to help deal with
transportation problems in the five East End towns. This authority
would not supplant the M.T.A. but work with it in a supporting role.
Keeping a direct rail connection to New York City should be important
to second-home owners and weekend visitors. Mr. Thiele's much-needed
attempt to seek some middle ground with the M.T.A. could help maintain
and perhaps improve this service. Now is not the time to abandon rail
service on the South Fork or make it less rider-friendly.
Posted by omor at 04:46 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 19, 2004
Eastern Long Island Newsday
Posted by dc at 11:28 PM | Comments (0)
January 12, 2004
MTA shortchanges eastern Long Island
M.T.A. Collects, Neglects Assemblyman Thiele proposes local authority
By Amanda Star Frazer
"Arrogant," "unresponsive," "not designed for us local folks," "the worst." East
End officials have no love for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the
quasi-public parent company of the Long Island Rail Road.
Just how public the authority is depends on who you ask. It collects millions of
dollars in taxes each year from the East End, but there is no guarantee any of
that money will be used to pay for trains to and from the two forks. Projects such
as the L.I.R.R. tunnels at Grand Central Terminal in New York are often a higher
priority.
State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. says that the five East End towns should
take matters into their own hands, particularly since public transportation is
becoming more critical as the roads are choked by traffic.
"The M.T.A. and the L.I.R.R. are perhaps the most unaccountable agencies in
state government," he said. "They're really almost immune from the Legislature
and the public."
Mr. Thiele has proposed a bill to establish a Peconic Bay Regional Transportation
Authority, which would either supplement or completely take the place of the
M.T.A. in directing East End transportation. He said he proposed the new agency
"because it was clear that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has no real
interest in solving East End transportation problems."
He is not alone in that opinion.
"One is not going to get cooperation from the M.T.A.," Southampton Town
Supervisor Patrick A. Heaney said. "That's an organization that has its own
mission that has nothing to do with public transportation. It marches to its own
drumbeat."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
M.T.A. Collects, Neglects Assemblyman Thiele proposes local authority
By Amanda Star Frazer
"Arrogant," "unresponsive," "not designed for us local folks," "the worst." East
End officials have no love for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the
quasi-public parent company of the Long Island Rail Road.
Just how public the authority is depends on who you ask. It collects millions of
dollars in taxes each year from the East End, but there is no guarantee any of
that money will be used to pay for trains to and from the two forks. Projects such
as the L.I.R.R. tunnels at Grand Central Terminal in New York are often a higher
priority.
State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. says that the five East End towns should
take matters into their own hands, particularly since public transportation is
becoming more critical as the roads are choked by traffic.
"The M.T.A. and the L.I.R.R. are perhaps the most unaccountable agencies in
state government," he said. "They're really almost immune from the Legislature
and the public."
Mr. Thiele has proposed a bill to establish a Peconic Bay Regional Transportation
Authority, which would either supplement or completely take the place of the
M.T.A. in directing East End transportation. He said he proposed the new agency
"because it was clear that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority has no real
interest in solving East End transportation problems."
He is not alone in that opinion.
"One is not going to get cooperation from the M.T.A.," Southampton Town
Supervisor Patrick A. Heaney said. "That's an organization that has its own
mission that has nothing to do with public transportation. It marches to its own
drumbeat."
Calling the M.T.A. arrogant, Mr. Heaney said, "It has made it very, very clear
that its mission is more about profit than providing trains to communities. This
agency is acting with total disregard for these communities. It's just wrong."
He suggested the authority had "to be leashed somehow, and that has to happen
at the state level." The supervisor added that he would give Mr. Thiele's bill
"1,000 percent of my support."
As would Southampton Councilwoman Linda Kabot, who tried to take the railroad
to task in 2002. "They're not really paying back into our community in terms of
service," she said.
Ms. Kabot had sent letters to the M.T.A./L.I.R.R. president, Ken Bauer, while
Southampton was in the midst of its own transportation study, encouraging the
Long Island Rail Road "to be a more energetic and cooperative player on the
East End."
She said the authority had been collecting half of all mortgage tax revenue and
"untold sums of money" from various telephone and energy surcharges on the
East End. In 2001, the M.T.A.'s share of mortgage tax from the East End alone
was $12.6 million, she said.
"The reality is they are investing this money in metropolitan New York," she said
later.
"We are shortchanged," agreed Mr. Thiele.
Mr. Bauer and representatives from the L.I.R.R. met with Ms. Kabot and Mr.
Heaney in 2002. While the meeting was cordial, Ms. Kabot said, it was fruitless.
"These railroad presidents come and go. Ken Bauer and his people recognized
our needs exceed what they can give right now. We need a better advocate, a
better voice that's getting to the railroad."
A Peconic transportation authority would do the job, she said. "You don't want to
form a whole 'nother super-agency, but if the super-agency you've got doesn't
work for you, you resort to these things."
Recommendations for improved rail service were included 10 years ago in
former Gov. Mario M. Cuomo's "Blueprint for Our Future." The document called
for additional railroad stations between Westhampton and Montauk, weekend
park and rail trains, an inter-hamlet rail shuttle, and integrated bus service.
None of it happened, Mr. Thiele pointed out. "Instead, the M.T.A. cut services.
Stations and ticket offices have been closed." And the authority still won't let
buses on its property.
Mr. Thiele said he had an idea why. "The L.I.R.R. still views itself largely as a
commuter railroad to move people in and out of New York. Consequently the
participation of the railroad in any East End transportation planning is zero.
They'll talk you to death but they do nothing."
L.I.R.R. officials disagreed. "We've made considerable improvements over the
last year," said Sam Zambuto, a railroad spokesman. He pointed to the
replacement of the diesel fleet, from mid-level to bi-level trains, improvements
at several East End train stations, and parking upgrades in Bridgehampton.
Of Mr. Thiele's legislation, he said, "We have not seen the bill so we couldn't
comment on that at this point."
Hank de Cillia, a transportation advocate with whom Mr. Thiele credited the idea
of an authority, said that in the New York area the railroad does its job fairly
well. "The L.I.R.R. credits itself as being the nation's largest commuter railroad.
It brings well over a million people in and out of the city every day."
On the East End, however, it is a different animal, he said. "Who knows, maybe
it's a numbers game. I can see why improvements on our end of the system are
always on the shelf or in the long-range plan. To be fair to them I don't think our
region has done a very good job communicating our wants and needs."
Like Mr. Thiele, he pointed to the Sustainable East End Development Strategies
initiative, which is exploring transportation possibilities with input from the five
towns and their villages. "Although SEEDS is moving painfully slow," he said, "I
still think it's the best chance we have."
Gerry Bogacz of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council said the
M.T.A. was indeed "at the table with SEEDS," whose concepts, he said, were
strictly in the idea stage. "Right now we're not looking at costs or hard
engineering," he said. "We're trying to get a sense of what everybody's willing to
look at for the future."
Jay Schneiderman, the former East Hampton Town supervisor who was sworn in
as a county legislator this week, said any M.T.A. improvments here would have
to be economically driven. "It's definitely going to come down to money. They're
going to tell you there's not enough ridership."
He said the railroad was designed to "bring people to the Hamptons from New
York but not to bring them back. It's not designed for any of us local folks."
"It's kind of like the L.I.R.R. missed the boat," he added. "Look at all the people
going to Manhattan by bus."
As town supervisor Mr. Schneiderman supported the concept of Mr. Thiele's bill.
With things the way they are now, "I just don't think anything will happen
because we want it to," he said.
Mr. Thiele said he expected to introduce the legislation in the Assembly next
week.
Posted by dc at 02:53 PM | Comments (0)
October 28, 2003
Hampton Jitney Boston
Bus Service:
Hampton Jitney Boston runs from Southampton, NY to
Boston via the Bridgeport-Port Jefferson Ferry. It makes one round
trip per day and costs $59 one way/$98 round trip. I assume the bus
is carried on the ferry, though it's possible that a different bus
meets passengers on each side. For some reason they leave half an
hour of padding meeting the ferry southbound, but an hour northbound
(90 minutes on Friday and Sunday).
Hampton Jitney's service is somewhat luxurious as buses go -- there's
an attendant that serves drinks and snacks. The bus makes some
intermediate stops on Long Island and also stops at the Riverside T
station in Newton, MA. This service makes things very convenient for
people who want to travel from eastern Long Island to Boston.
Posted by dc at 03:39 AM | Comments (1)
October 04, 2003
Village Of Sagaponack
In an apparent attempt to pre-empt their oceanfront neighbors, a group of
Sagaponack residents filed a petition yesterday to incorporate their community
into a village. The petition, signed by 100 residents, is the second filed this year in
Southampton Town.
Petition For 'Village' Of Sagaponack
Residents seek to halt drive for Dunehampton
By Katie Thomas, STAFF WRITER
2003 October 03
In an apparent attempt to pre-empt their oceanfront neighbors, a group of
Sagaponack residents filed a petition yesterday to incorporate their community
into a village.
The petition, signed by 100 residents, is the second filed this year in
Southampton Town. In July, a group of beachfront homeowners proposed the
Village of Dunehampton, which would have shaved a sliver of shoreline off the
hamlets of Sagaponack, Bridgehampton and Water Mill. The effort was defeated
last month when Town Supervisor Patrick Heaney invalidated their petition.
Lee Foster, who helped organize the Sagaponack effort, acknowledged that the
move was an attempt to prevent Dunehampton supporters from trying again.
"It's like fighting fire with fire, in a way," she said. Dunehampton opponents say
they fear the proposed village would prevent their access to public beaches and
could raise property taxes.
While state law allows residents to form their own village in unincorporated areas
of towns, no provision seems to exist for forming a new village inside an existing
village. "If this village gets formed, I think it totally stymies the attempts of
Dunehampton," said town board member Steve Kenny, who earlier this spring
spearheaded the town's new shoreline protection law. The law spurred the
Dunehampton effort after beachfront homeowners claimed it prevented them
from rebuilding their homes after a storm.
Kenny said he would support the Sagaponack residents' efforts. "I don't think
they're out to harm the town. This is a group I know the town can work with," he
said.
Joe Prokop, a lawyer for the Dunehampton supporters, declined to comment
yesterday.
After sitting through hours of spirited debate on the Dunehampton issue, Heaney
said yesterday he was shocked that its opponents were now trying to create their
own village. "It came to me as a complete surprise," he said. "When the
opponents of one village decide that the cure is the formation of another village,
I'm left shaking my head."
Town board member Dennis Suskind agreed. "I'm having a feeling that I'm in an
episode of 'The Twilight Zone,'" he said. "It doesn't seem to be the way to go."
To create a village under state law, proponents must first submit a petition
signed by at least 20 percent of the area's registered voters. The area must
include at least 500 residents and cannot be larger than five square miles.
According to the Long Island Power Authority's 2002 population survey, 606
people live in Sagaponack.
Foes of Dunehampton have said they opposed that village because it didn't
coincide with any historic community - the new village would have no school, no
post office, not even a store. For that reason, many said they saw no hypocrisy
in supporting the incorporation of Sagaponack - and maybe even Bridgehampton
and Water Mill.
"We have inhabitants, we have a church, we have a school, stores, a fire
department," said Patti Goldstein, who lives in Bridgehampton and is a member
of Friends of the Community, a group that opposes Dunehampton. She planned
to attend a meeting last night of Bridgehampton residents who were themselves
discussing incorporation. "If it was a way to stop Dunehampton, then I'd be in
favor of it."
Al Colina, co-chairman of the Water Mill Citizens Advisory Committee, a group
appointed by Southampton Town, said incorporating Water Mill has come up for
discussion at least twice at meetings. Colina said he was "interested" in the issue
but couldn't take a stand because of his position on the committee.
"Anywhere you go, there are people who are talking about it," Colina said.
Copyright © 2003, Newsday, Inc.
Posted by dc at 07:49 PM | Comments (0)
September 16, 2003
East Hampton plan
Topic Tonight: East Hampton Blueprint
By Katie Thomas, STAFF WRITER
2003 September 18
Three years after work began on a blueprint for East Hampton's future, the town
board will give residents tonight what may be their last chance to speak out on
the town's proposed comprehensive plan.
To get to this point, board members have sat through dozens of public meetings
and perused hundreds of pages of committee recommendations, not to mention
two consultants' reports.
But even though the proposed plan, which will guide development for the next 20
years, is nearly complete, residents are still divided about whether it should be
adopted. Most of the debate centers on whether the town can aim to reduce
future "buildout," a technical term for the maximum number of housing units the
town might eventually hold - and hence the total number of people who might
live there.
While the town's planning consultants, Manhattan-based Horne Rose, say their
report aims to reduce buildout by passing more restrictive zoning and other
measures, they say that limiting buildout, as an end to itself, is illegal. Instead,
they argue that decreasing the town's future size is possible if it's justified by
other goals, such as protecting groundwater.
"We absolutely can limit or reduce our buildout," said Republican town board
member Diana Weir, whose party holds a slim 3-2 majority in Town Hall. "The
plan clearly says that."
But opponents - including Democrats, who are trying to win control of the board
in this November's elections - say the plan may lead to an increase in buildout
because it suggests intensifying growth in hamlet centers while limiting it in
outlying areas.
"I think what everybody in town is saying is, 'Look, we want less [growth] in the
hamlets and we want less outside the hamlets,'" said David Gruber, the town's
Democratic Party chairman. "To a large extent this document is not usable."
While Weir said she is determined to pass the plan while her party holds a
majority, town board member Pete Hammerle, who like Weir is running for
re-election this fall, said he would favor hiring yet another consultant if
Democrats win control. "I have a strong sense that the people I talk to don't want
to see this adopted," he said.
This kind of back-and-forth has exasperated many residents, said Robert
DeLuca, president of the Bridgehampton-based environmental organization, the
Group for the South Fork. "Some kind of action, after all of this chewing on the
process, would make people feel a lot better," he said.
Posted by dc at 09:04 PM | Comments (0)
September 15, 2003
dunehampton petition
The mere idea of Dunehampton, a thin sliver of mostly oceanfront property that
would run from Water Mill to the East Hampton town line, had been criticized by
one town councilman as "Richampton" and attacked as an entity that was being
created only so the people who lived there would not have to follow the laws of
Southampton Town.
But its supporters argued they had as much right to control their own destiny as
do the residents of any other village in Southampton, and feared that town
coastal protection regulations would prevent them from rebuilding their homes if
they were damaged in a hurricane.
Southampton Rejects Dunehampton Petitions
By Mitchell Freedman, Staff Writer
2003 September 15, 8:34 PM EDT
Southampton Supervisor Patrick Heaney ruled Monday that petitions calling for
the creation of a new oceanfront village in his town -- Dunehampton -- are
invalid.
In a highly anticipated decision, Heaney ruled that the petitions were deficient
because the proposed village did not contain the minimum 500 residents required
by state law.
The petitions calling for the creation of the new village were filed in no particular
order, neither by name nor street address.
When the town cross-indexed the names, Heaney said, they found 193 people
were listed as residents of just 11 houses. Heaney noted that one Sagaponack
resident found herself listed as a resident of the proposed village although she
told the person carrying petitions that she lived and voted in Princeton, N.J., and
would not change her residence.
The new proposed village's supporters, Heaney noted, did admit that six people
listed as residents in their petition were dead and should not have been counted.
The supervisor's ruling, which Southampton officials expect to be challenged in
court, means that no vote will be set on the creation of what might have been
one of the richest villages in the nation.
Heaney said he expects to be sued by supporters of the village, just as he
expected its opponents would have sued him if he had decided the other way.
And while this set petitions appears dead, Heaney noted there is no reason to
believe the idea of forming the village will end. "It's an open-ended process," he
said. "They [village advocates] can always correct the defects and resubmit."
Joseph Prokop, the attorney for the petitioners, has 30 days to appeal Heaney's
decision in court. "We continue to believe the petitions were sufficient," he said,
adding that no decision has been made on whether to appeal or file new
petitions. "We intend to do either one or both."
The mere idea of Dunehampton, a thin sliver of mostly oceanfront property that
would run from Water Mill to the East Hampton town line, had been criticized by
one town councilman as "Richampton" and attacked as an entity that was being
created only so the people who lived there would not have to follow the laws of
Southampton Town.
But its supporters argued they had as much right to control their own destiny as
do the residents of any other village in Southampton, and feared that town
coastal protection regulations would prevent them from rebuilding their homes if
they were damaged in a hurricane.
The question of residence is not a simple one because there is no definition of
residence in the part of the state law that applies to the creation of villages.
And because many of the houses in the proposed village are used as summer
homes, some property owners argued they could use any of their homes as a
residence for voting purposes.
But no one can vote twice in the same election, and Heaney said the Suffolk
Board of Elections showed only 212 registered voters in the area of the proposed
village. He reduced that number to 194, removing people who were registered as
voters but no longer lived in the proposed village.
Heaney said each couple would need 3.2 children to reach the population target
of 500 people. But voter registration rolls show 126 voters who are 55 or older,
and unlikely to have many school-age children living with them.
The supervisor said it would take an average of more than seven 8.74 children in
each remaining house to get to the population target.
There are 260 houses in the proposed Dunehampton area, but 183 of the 243 tax
bills for them -- some people own two or more houses and get just one bill -- go
to out-of-town addresses.
Dunehampton was strongly supported by a number of local residents, but just as
bitterly opposed by others -- some of whom feared they would no longer be able
to park on the new village's streets and would be kept from the ocean beaches.
And, they added, Dunehampton would have split communities that date back to
the 1640s. "They were attacking history," said Alfred Kelman, who opposes the
new village.
Copyright © 2003, Newsday, Inc.
newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lidune0915,0,4734846.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines
Posted by dc at 11:53 PM | Comments (0)
September 05, 2003
Idling trains in Montauk
Sound Off About Noise
By Kitty Merrill
A new Montauk group is making noise about noise. Last week, members of the
Montauk Anti Pollution Coalition demanded that the MTA cease what they call "the
single largest source of industrial noise pollution" in Montauk -- the continuous
idling of the Long Island Railroad’s diesel engines. A law firm hired by MAP may
even pursue litigation if the noise doesn’t stop.
A hefty report prepared by MAP includes a CD of the noise, pictures of trains
stored at the Montauk station, and a petition boasting 1000 signatures. "The
noise levels created by long term idling engines pierce the air and invade closed
windows and door dwellings up to miles from the station," the petition states.
Letters of complaint about the noise from the Concerned Citizens of Montauk and
the Montauk Citizens Advisory Committee are also included, as is a letter from
the general manager of the Montauk Manor, Janice Nessel. Noise has contributed
to the loss of thousands of dollars for the Manor, as guests who come to enjoy
Montauk’s beautiful sunset views and fresh air "are outraged at the sound levels
that go on throughout the night." They usually demand a room change or a
refund, Nessel’s letter reports. At the outdoor area of the Manor’s restaurants,
"First and only time customers complain of an excellent meal ruined by the nerve
wracking noise level."
The LIRR stores as many as seven trains at one time in Montauk, according to
MAP documents. They are permitted to idle indefinitely, and a number of them
don’t even provide service to Montauk.
MAP also takes issue with the condition of the LIRR site. "The area is garbage
strewn, with a variety of overflowing dumpsters, various old, rusted equipment,
and a general run down shanty-like appearance," the report states. Fifty
five-gallon drums, which appear to contain chemical or petroleum products, are
stacked haphazardly along the tracks, unfenced and open to access.
MAP provided the MTA with research, demonstrating that idling engines is both
unnecessary and inefficient. It also pointed out that the utility has ceased the
practice when confronted with complaints.
On Monday LIRR spokesman Sam Zambuto issued a statement in response to
MAP’s contention. It reads: "The Long Island Rail Road makes every effort to
reduce the sound coming from trains that are at Montauk Station awaiting their
return trip. The LIRR has implemented procedures, and has supervision
monitoring the trains at Montauk, to help limit the length of time that trains idle at
the station. We will continue to look for ways to reduce the sound coming from
trains while they wait to leave the station."
They better look hard. According MAP’s chair Tom Bogdan, "There’s been a
tremendous groundswell of public support for (the group’s efforts)." While the
problem has been around for a long time, complaints to the LIRR and MTA came
from "individual people who aimed too low and took ‘No’ for an answer," Bogdan
explained, adding, "We’re not going to do it."
from
http://www.indyeastend.com/detail.asp?cat=news&article=1188
Posted by dc at 09:57 PM | Comments (0)
September 02, 2003
On Montauk
On Montauk portal.
Posted by dc at 07:38 PM | Comments (0)
May 28, 2003
Hamptons Magazine
Hamptons Magazine' s dining guide.
Posted by dc at 08:41 PM | Comments (0)
May 14, 2003
Affordable Southampton
But after calculating the median cost of housing on a community-by-community
basis, town officials learned the only place in Southampton where moderate-income
families could afford to buy a home is the one place where the town already has
promised not to build more affordable housing. That is the
Flanders-Riverside-Northampton area, which has the highest density zoning in
Southampton, the lowest median income and already has more than its share of
low- and moderate-cost housing.
Posted by dc at 10:39 PM | Comments (0)
April 22, 2003
Eastern Suffolk map
Posted by dc at 11:41 PM | Comments (0)
March 18, 2003
Montauk vs Freeport
Dan Stavola, a mason contractor and resident, demanded to know why
the town board "would want to turn Montauk into the Bronx of the East
End.
We don't want Hampton Bays out here. We don't want Freeport out here.
Montauk, he added, "is turning into a hole.
Newsday, 2003 Feb 05
Posted by dc at 08:54 PM | Comments (0)
January 23, 2003
East End LI / Hamptons dex
Posted by dc at 08:47 PM | Comments (0)