Saunders, Real Estate, Hamptons

13 Comments by Group for the East End

Local Fishermen Rescue Tropical Bird Lost Out At Sea

Great work by Capt Green and crew and to all the folks at the Wildlife Rescue Center in Hampton Bays. Very nice story indeed!
" Feb 13, 13 10:35 AM

Southampton Town To Preserve Small Slice Of Parrish Pond, Sacred To Tribe

Protection of this parcel while small, is exceptionally important and should be pursued with all vigor. Sadly, in 2000 the Town could have designed this development to save an extensive portion of this 63-acre site which was well-known to have ecological, recreational and archeological significance at no cost. Unfortunately, despite the pleas of conservationists and the Shinnecock People, the Planning Board majority did nothing to prevent the desecration of this land adding further insult to the injuries long heaped upon the native people of our region. It was a terrible, conscious and permanent failure of town leadership and planning that we should neither forget nor forgive. " Sep 11, 14 10:08 AM

Court Rules That Sand Land Must Discontinue Mulching Facilty

For all concerned - Worth a read:
From the Executive Summary of the Suffolk County Health Department's recent investigation of vegetative waste facilities in Suffolk County. The full study is available online from the Suffolk County website.

"The data collected indicates that water quality downgradient of the vegetative organic waste management (VOWM) facilities studied exhibited impacts.Most notably, an increase in metals concentrations, particularly manganese, and increased detections of radiological parameters (gross alpha and gross beta) were observed downgradient of both the Great Gardens/Horseblock Road Facility and the sites evaluated in this study. The groundwater impacts
observed downgradient of the Great Gardens/Horseblock Road Facility do not appear to be unique to this facility. Similar groundwater impacts have now been observed at many compost/vegetative organic waste facilities throughout Suffolk County and appear to be related to the compost/vegetative waste operations taking place at these sites." " Apr 3, 16 11:04 PM

Sand Land Calls For Investigation Of The Bridge Golf Club

Sand Land has been ordered by an Appellate Court to cease its unlawful waste processing operations, which represent a documented risk of contamination to the most sensitive drinking water protection area in the Town.

Instead of complying, Sand Land has unleashed a torrent of legal maneuvering that wastes taxpayer dollars and serves only to keep an unlawful operation up and running, without regard to the public consequences.

This latest side show is just more of the same. If The Bridge overcleared anything they should and evidence shows, will fix it, but whatever issues may exist at the Bridge, they are microscopic in comparison to what is going on down in the Sand Land pit.

This will take time, but in the end, there is no smoke screen, petty diversion, or misdirection play that can change the reality that this operation should not have been allowed, was deemed by the Courts to be unlawful, remains a threat to our vulnerable supply of clean water and must be extinguished." Jun 8, 16 12:49 PM

East Quogue Civic Association Meeting To Discuss 'The Hills' Turns To Screaming Match

Group for the East End has sought full protection of this property for the better part of the last decade and worked with a coalition of civic and environmental groups to press for that outcome.

Full protection of the site was nearly achieved but last minute wrangling prevented that sale from happening. The money wast there, but the developer decided not to sell.

We have, and will continue to oppose The Hills PDD for three simple reasons:
1} The underling zoning is the most protective in the Town and it was established specifically to protect water quality. There is no reason to change this zoning. 2) Other PDD applications like Sebonack Golf Course had expansive pre-existing nonconforming uses and substantial development density that could have laid waste to the property if built out - that is not the case here. 3) The Hills property represents a rare and large piece of intact pine barrens habitat. Protection of that habitat is an essential goal of the NYS Pine Barrens Act, and it should be protected from further fragmentation. Intact habitat also helps the site provide a permanent source of clean fresh water to one of the most impaired tributaries entering Shinnecock Bay. For these reasons we have asked Supervisor Schneiderman and the Town Board to terminate the review of this application., " Jun 22, 16 5:07 PM

Alec Baldwin Will Push Pine Barrens Commission To Review 'The Hills'

Lion, the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) specifically requests that involved agencies participate in the review process from the earliest stages of an application. The problem with waiting until a DEIS is final is that much of the impact assessment, development design and proposed mitigation is already defined and the opportunity to make substantial changes is reduced as a regular matter of practice. For the record, I spent nearly a decade conducting involved agency reviews for the Suffolk County Health Department, I also taught the SEQRA process for over 15 years at LIU, and have conducted technical reviews for hundreds projects pursuant to SEQRA for more than 30 years. Based on this experience, there is no question that the longer an involved agency waits to engage, the more difficult it is to integrate that agency's comments into the final design and overall project consideration. We just want the Pine Barrens Commission to have the best possible opportunity to review the largest development proposal in the Pine Barrens. Thanks, Bob DeLuca " Jul 14, 16 11:48 AM

Revised Tuckahoe Center Proposal Submitted To Southampton Town

The insanity continues! When will the Town learn that every study in the last 40 years has called for reducing high volume traffic-producing uses on County Road 39 and just say NO to this project. Developers will keep at it only so long as the Town keeps leading them on. This application can be rejected without any further review and the Town Board knows it, so why does the Board keep breathing life into projects that have been overwhelmingly rejected by the community. How many more accidents or deaths on County Road 39 will it take to make the point that Enough is Enough!" Aug 10, 16 9:50 AM

McAllister Offers Opinion On Hills Proposal, Says PDD Plan Would Have Less Impact On Environment

Well said. There are certainly far more than two possible outcomes for this property and anyone experienced with town planning and zoning knows it.

The entire point of the environmental review process under State law is to identify alternatives that minimize environmental impacts, and the Town has broad latitude in what it can require. This remains true whether the application is a PDD or a standard subdivision, so lets get past the constant comparison between The Hills PDD and some phantom "as of right" development that would never be approved.

Readers should also know that concerns about the adequacy of this project's nitrogen mitigation extend beyond Dr. Gobler. Concerns have been raised by the Pine Barrens Review Commission and expert hydrogeologists from the nationally recognized firm of Leleggette Brashears & Graham. We hope the Press will examine the full spectrum of technical comments offered by all qualified reviewers. " Feb 15, 17 6:45 PM

Suffolk County Planning Commission Approves The Hills Golf Course Resort In East Quogue

This article would do well to point out that of its 15 mostly "up-island" members, the Planning Commission still does not have its required representative from the Town of Southampton. The Town's former representative resigned in protest in 2016, over her experience of undue political influence in the Commissions deliberations.

That Southampton's largest development project in a generation was debated before the entire Commission with zero input from any Southampton Town representative is tragic.

This article also fails to accurately report on the concerns raised by the Commission regarding the use of potentially contaminated groundwater for irrigation. We were at the meeting, and the Commission's staff report makes it quite clear that their primary concern was the lack of information about whether the proposed "fertigation" process might suck up old pesticides and contaminants from the areas longstanding agricultural use.

That's a really good question for which the Town has yet to require an answer.
" Nov 3, 17 6:19 PM

1. The "Riverside Urban Renewal Plan" is a regional rezoning plan covering hundreds of small properties in a blighted and impoverished, already developed area with over 350 residential parcels. The entire study area is less than 500 acres of which only 20% is undeveloped. This is quite different from a single 600-acre application with one developer that will occur immediately upon approval. The best estimate for Riverside is a decade or more and without any resolution to the septic issues, the entire future of the project remains uncertain.
2. The contamination potential from "fertigation" source water is a rational concern that that the Town should address as part of any reasonable environmental review - would think Discovery could agree with this.
3. We have never argued that the lack of a Southampton Town representative on the Commission is a problem of Discovery's making - it isn't. Nonetheless, it still is a disservice to the people of the Town on The Hills review or any other signifiant proposal. " Nov 4, 17 12:24 PM

1. The Bridge has 20 or 21 residential lots (on just under 600 acres) and Sebonack less than 20 guest cottages. The Hills proposes a golf course and 118 residential units on undeveloped property with the Town's most stringent zoning already in place which is also adjacent to the already impaired surface waters of Shinnecock Bay. That's the difference.

2.Also, the elimination of pre-existing nonconforming uses is a well defined, long-standing community benefit supported by decades of municipal planning and zoning. Why is this nonsense now if it wasn't when you and your team were working on Sebonack? In fact, our position on Sebonack was based in significant part on what the site's preexisting development density might yield.

3. You will also recall that The Bridge (at the town's invitation) was originally proposed as two golf courses, a conference center and something like 100 or more development units. We staunchly opposed the project, litigated it for years, and in the end the final project was less than half of what was proposed. Today, the owner agrees that our position on the matter was the right one and that the course, its members and the environment are all better served by the efforts we and many other concerned citizens have made at the time. That is the kind of outcome we can support. " Nov 4, 17 12:50 PM

Bob here,
I am fine with the broad concept of phytoremediation, however understanding what contaminants might be encountered in the fertigation "source water" is a basic and reasonable request given the amount of water that will be used for this purpose over time.

This issue was raised by the Planning Commission as well as us for the same reason, which is that over the years the County Health Department has found that groundwater which is high in nitrogen from agricultural use is often indicative of additional contamination for other - sometimes banned - agricultural chemicals.

This could be the same with your parcel - maybe not. But knowing what's there could be important to reducing any potential human exposure pathways to legacy contaminants, or informing whether any further treatment of this source water is needed.

" Nov 4, 17 1:36 PM

Group For The East End Hosts Benefit At The Bridge

The impact of land use on our region's environment has been the focus of the Group's work since 1972, it's never been about being for or against golf courses. The Bridge was proposed as two courses, a conference center, and condo development. It was far too much development intensity for the site (which lies in a Special Groundwater Protection Area), so we vigorously opposed the application and sought alternatives.

As a result of significant public advocacy and a willingness of the project's owner to listen to community concerns, the final development (which involved the redevelopment of a race track) permitted a single course (built largely within the infield of the track) and 20 residential lots on just about 600 acres. The project also set a new standard for the comprehensive groundwater monitoring of golf courses across the East End. Given what zoning allowed at the time (which differs from site to site), this was an acceptable outcome, and an example of meaningful compromise in the pubic interest.

That is what we strive for.
" Jun 18, 19 3:29 PM