tennis, club, lessons, indoor tennis, camp
27east.com

Story - News

May 22, 2017 11:45 AMPublication: The Southampton Press

'The Hills' Developer Selects Wastewater Treatment System

May 24, 2017 1:30 PM

The developer looking to construct a luxury golf resort in East Quogue, one featuring 118 residential units and an 18-hole golf course, has picked the type of advanced wastewater treatment system that it would like to see service the complex—if the Southampton Town Board ultimately approves the application.

One of the more appealing features of the Baswood BioVore system, a modular unit manufactured by Baswood Corporation in Allen, Texas, is that the developer, the Discovery Land Company of Arizona, could eventually expand the system so it services other parts of the hamlet, including the East Quogue Elementary School on Central Avenue, according to Tom Lembo, a partner at Nelson, Pope and Voorhis in Melville, an engineering and surveying firm hired by Discovery.

Mr. Lembo noted that such a unit can handle up to 90,000 gallons of wastewater daily—more than double what the development, called “The Hills at Southampton,” is expected to generate each day during the summer months, the peak occupation time for the seasonal community. If the Baswood BioVore sewage treatment system, which is now being reviewed by the Suffolk County Health Department, is eventually installed in East Quogue, up to several dozen nearby single-family homes, as well as the hamlet’s elementary school, also eventually could be connected to the plant, according to Mr. Lembo.

“At this point in time, it’s planned to service the development,” he said, referring to the Baswood BioVore system. “But because the original design is modular, it could triple the flow.”

Michael Walker, a Baswood Corporation representative, said in an email that the system would cost approximately $2.65 million to purchase and install.

The Baswood BioVore system features three vessels, or compartments, that contain different “environments,” each relying on different natural chemical reactions to break apart the components of wastewater, Mr. Walker explained. In each vessel, bacteria grow and digest contaminants, primarily nitrogen, and remove them from the wastewater stream. In total, all waste would be broken down nine times—three times per vessel—before exiting the enclosed system and being released into the groundwater via an field of leaching pools.

Mr. Walker explained that the breakdown process is most efficient when there is a steady flow of waste, adding that one or more of the vessels could be turned off when the resort homes are unoccupied. Noting the number of times waste is broken down, he added that the system offers an “exponential amount of treatment” when compared to other similar systems.

According to Mr. Lembo, the same system is already installed at two other Discovery Land Resorts: the Chileno Bay Golf and Beach Club in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico, and the Silo Ridge Field Club in Amenia, New York. Installed in 2014, the Baswood BioVore system at Chileno Bay reduces the amount of nitrogen in wastewater to 9 milligrams per liter, Mr. Lembo said, adding that the testing was completed by the manufacturer. By comparison, Suffolk County and New York State require that nitrogen levels in drinking water come in at less than 10 mg/l.

The Amenia system was approved by Dutchess County earlier this year and is now being installed, according to Bill Faulds, chief technical officer for Baswood Corporation.

Officials with the Suffolk County Health Department said they are still reviewing the system, which was developed in the early 1980s, and are waiting for more information from the manufacturer about how it works.

Mr. Faulds said in an email this week that he expects the system to be approved in Suffolk County this fall. He explained that the final permit documentation is currently in preparation and officials from Baswood have been involved in ongoing discussions with the county to get them the information that is still required.

Robert DeLuca, president of Group for the East End, a nonprofit based in Southold that often reviews the potential environmental impact of large-scale developments, said that while he has heard of the Baswood BioVore system, he has not seen much data about its effectiveness in removing nitrogen, or other pollutants, from wastewater.

A vocal opponent of The Hills, a planned development district that targets nearly 600 acres in East Quogue, Mr. DeLuca and Lisa Liquori, an environmental planning consultant and a former East Hampton Town planning director who was hired by Group for the East End, presented late last year a reduced impact alternative to the luxury golf course development—a plan that featured a mix of housing and equestrian facilities but no golf course. Their plan, which proposed 88 residential units that would not require altering the zoning of the 5-acre property, also included a sewage treatment system and not traditional cesspools.

“The alternative said there should be sewage treatment no matter what goes in, because of the sensitivity of the groundwater,” said Mr. DeLuca, who has previously stated that Discovery Land, in all likelihood, would be required by Suffolk County to install a sewage treatment plant even if its PDD is rejected by the town and the developer builds a traditional subdivision instead.

Mark Hissey, vice president of Discovery Land, said he is “optimistic” about the proposed wastewater treatment system, pointing to the fact that it could be expanded to service other areas in East Quogue, and that it is already servicing one of two communities built by the developer. The one installed at the Chileno Bay Golf and Beach Club already services 228 residential units, a mix of villas, homes and smaller houses, while the Silo Ridge Field Club eventually will be connected to 245 single-family homes.

And like the proposal in East Quogue, both communities also feature 18-hole golf courses.

Kevin McAllister, founder of Defend H2O and a former Peconic Baykeeper, said he has researched the Baswood BioVore system and noted that it has a “strong record of performance.” Like Mr. Hissey, Mr. McAllister, who has previously stated that he thinks the proposed development is the best option for the East Quogue site if it cannot be preserved, said he likes that modifications can be made to the wastewater treatment system, meaning that it can eventually be connected to other nearby homes and, possibly, East Quogue Elementary School.

Mr. Lembo said Discovery Land chose the system because of its ability to adjust to different levels of flow—something that Mr. McAllister said is an important aspect to look out for in a system servicing a seasonal facility—as well as its capability of also serving other parts of East Quogue, an area with widespread nitrogen contamination.

You have read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Yes! I'll try a one-month
Premium Membership
for just 99¢!
CLICK HERE

Already a subscriber? LOG IN HERE

This Discovery Land Company seems like a determined lot -- determined to wear the opposition down.




By Frank Wheeler (1710), Northampton on May 22, 17 9:25 PM
1 member liked this comment
Whoa! They're going to actually put in a sewage system just to eliminate nitrogen from allowable septic systems going into the ground? Despicable! Will they stop at no underhanded devices to get their approval?
By VOS (953), WHB on May 23, 17 6:05 AM
1 member liked this comment
I guess EQ wasn't good enough for this before even though they already have it at other locations?? They only act when forced - shows how disingenuous they are.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 23, 17 10:14 AM
1 member liked this comment
Who only acts when forced?
By dnice (1933), Hampton Bays on May 23, 17 10:36 AM
A $2.65 million expense, for a needed treatment facility, does not justify giving this developer a $100 million worth of zoning variance. And the East Quogue elementary school doesn't currently treat waste water? The 100 or so youngsters enrolled there need an upgrade to their toilets?
By dfree (301), hampton bays on May 23, 17 11:59 AM
There are 100 or so adults and over 400 children at the East Quogue Elementary school.
By cmac (84), East Quogue on May 25, 17 8:03 AM
OK, first let's remember that Tom Lembo's firm and Kevin McAllister are being paid by the developer, Discovery Land Co. Just something to bear in mind.

Let's also remember what another commenter in another thread has pertinently noted, namely, that this whole discussion about alleged nitrogen removal is irrelevant, because the PDD law demands a community benefit intrinsic to the project, and this project just doesn't have that. Right there, it gets scratched.

But let's look at ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 23, 17 1:51 PM
1 member liked this comment
Well TB, we sure enjoyed your journey through the science fiction of bacteria and nitrogen fixation. Kids in the East Quogue Elementary School have a better grasp on biology than do you. Were you one of the State's attorneys during the Scopes trial?
By Lion (168), southampton on May 23, 17 7:40 PM
2 members liked this comment
Alright, Lion, so you've snarked out one of the seven points I made. What about the other six? Just to refresh you: Lembo and McAllister paid by Discovery, no intrinsic community benefit, little or no data on system, will have treatment system with traditional subdivision, market won't support traditional subdivision, system won't treat golf course runoff. Be specific and complete in your answers, please.
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 24, 17 9:44 AM
This post has been reported. Kevin McAllister is not on the payroll of Discovery Land Company. That is a slanderous and absolutely unsubstantiated claim by you. Tom Lembo is a licensed professional with the firm of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis.

I won't address your other baseless speculation in this post because as you've made abundantly clear, you think I am a liar. But I will call out your lies and defamations.
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 24, 17 2:22 PM
2 members liked this comment
You're right about Kevin McAllister. I confused him with one of the many other consultants and experts that you have on your payroll, which number of course includes Tom Lembo's firm. (It's hard to keep track of so many.) In any event, I apologize to Mr. McAllister and ask him to accept the apology of one who isn't perfect but is willing admit a mistake, freely and publicly.

So what about the other 5 1/2 points I raised? You can't avoid them by the broad brush accusation of "baseless ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 24, 17 3:16 PM
I know Turkey Bridge has retracted the remark about Kevin McAllister and apologized, but I thought I'd just add my two cents here.

In a recent interview with Kevin, I asked him, flatly, whether he's being paid in any way by Discovery, or if his organization has been promised support by Discovery in connection with his positions on the science of the project.

His answer was an unqualified "no" to both questions--and he added that he would return any check he would receive, because ...more
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (200), Hampton Bays on May 24, 17 3:47 PM
2 members liked this comment
'Slanderous'....LOL
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on May 24, 17 4:13 PM
Well it looks like another one of your seven points has been addressed by Mr. Hissey and Mr.Shaw. You apologized, and believe that's sufficient? I don't. Your arrogance and intentional dissemination of misinformation is very obvious. There's no need to respond to your other points, blasphemy is well, blasphemy.
By Lion (168), southampton on May 24, 17 10:47 PM
2 members liked this comment
No intrinsic benefit to EQ: EQ Hamlet has no real substantive anchor to its economic stability. This project especially due to its golf course provides local opportunities for improving the economy- jobs, goods and tax base.
No data on Basswood- false go to Dutchess County and ask to review what they have-FOIL it.
Standard subdivision sanitary disposal- individual systems are easily approved by SCDOH, you, the Group for the East End and the Town have no authority over sanitary wastewater ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 24, 17 11:09 PM
1 member liked this comment
No intrinsic benefit to EQ: EQ Hamlet has no real substantive anchor to its economic stability. This project especially due to its golf course provides local opportunities for improving the economy- jobs, goods and tax base.
No data on Basswood- false go to Dutchess County and ask to review what they have-FOIL it.
Standard subdivision sanitary disposal- individual systems are easily approved by SCDOH, you, the Group for the East End and the Town have no authority over sanitary wastewater ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 24, 17 11:09 PM
Lion, you're more than a little confused here. At 10:47 PM you say you don't need to respond to my arguments because they're "blasphemy." Really? Blasphemy? You've got the word wrong and you've got the level of offense wrong. If I haven't said so before, mine was a wholly unintentional mistake, a slip by someone trying unsuccessfully to keep track of the very many consultants and experts hired by the developer, Discovery Land Co. Blasphemy? Hardly.

But then, just 22 minutes later ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 25, 17 1:53 PM
1 member liked this comment
You state that you recently interviewed McAllister, and indicate you discussed the Hills with him, What else did he say about the project ?
You limit yourself to two cents worth of comments when it cost me a whole buck to read your editorial...
By Lion (168), southampton on May 27, 17 1:48 PM
The PESTICIDES are the elephant in the room. They will be SPRAYED (airborne) over the golf course before they even get to the grass! Right next to the school. Workers wear hazmat suits during application. Parents, are you listening? Lower school taxes in exchange for exposing your kids to pesticides.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 23, 17 2:42 PM
1 member liked this comment
What lower school taxes? Not that it matters in the context of exposing kids to pesticide, but in fact, they won't even get that in exchange.
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 23, 17 4:51 PM
The elephant? Do you know what is being applied? What class of pesticide it is? Do you know what PPE requirements are? My guess is you know very little about any of it.
By dnice (1933), Hampton Bays on May 23, 17 8:02 PM
1 member liked this comment
Any of those kids treated for head lice with spinosad? You appear to have little understanding of pesticide apllication or the laws governing them. Please, Stop ramping up the drama and fear mongering and learn about NY pesticide law. .
By Lion (168), southampton on May 23, 17 8:52 PM
1 member liked this comment
Can you please describe your theory on how this exposure is supposed to happen? It seems to defy the laws of physics. The protocol is thoroughly described in the ITHM. It's very thorough.
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 24, 17 2:26 PM
1 member liked this comment
Whether or not the people like to hear it, every property comes with rights. Obviously this parcel(s) has, as of right, the ability to build many homes under current zoning. The builders obviously see $igns and the developers have rejected offers to be purchased by the government. So in some form or another there is going to be a development there.
By North Sea Citizen (446), North Sea on May 23, 17 5:12 PM
This developer will sell in a heartbeat if this $100 million zoning variance is granted, and that's the opportunity for preservation.
By dfree (301), hampton bays on May 23, 17 5:24 PM
I can assure you, 110%, that this will not happen.
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 24, 17 2:17 PM
1 member liked this comment
PESTICIDES are killers, no matter how classified. We had a PhD in Organic Chemistry and professor of Chemistry and environmental science speak at some of our Town hearings on the Hills warning us of the dangers. A written analysis was submitted as well concluding that "approval of this change of zone is serioulsy ill-advised." Google any of the pesticides listed below from the 4th DEIS and tell me you would not fear your children being exposed to them: "The January 2015 and March 2016 versions ...more
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 24, 17 10:37 AM
And your point is that the January 2015 list has a low potential for leaching. Which is what; a bad thing for groundwater protection?
By Lion (168), southampton on May 24, 17 10:56 PM
What I meant in my last comment, was if the $100 million is NOT approved, then Discovery Land will sale, and the offer price should be whatever original cost they paid, less 10%, so they can take their tax loss and move on to other locations where folks don't care about clean drinking water or the enjoyment of wildlife.
By dfree (301), hampton bays on May 24, 17 10:50 AM
No. That won't happen. The scenario that you are describing is tantamount to extortion, not that the land will be sold anyway.

Please understand something clearly. This land is has been zoned under the most strict provisions in Long Island. Five acre zoning. 28% of this land will be preserved in its entirety. The clean drinking water you describe in an absolute priority for this project and this project does not jeopardize that at all. The aquifer that supplies us all is under practically ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 24, 17 2:36 PM
1 member liked this comment
...no community benefits to the project tho
By dogfacejones (78), Southampton on May 24, 17 4:30 PM
2 members liked this comment
Most of these idiots in EQ who are against the project live on less than a half acre or like the major big mouth who lives on the bay. Can't make this up.
By chief1 (2292), southampton on May 24, 17 12:27 PM
What does this have to do with the requirement that PDD's must have an intrinsic community benefit?

There are plenty of idiots in East Quogue (Southampton as well)...this fact just doesn't have anything to do with the debate.
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on May 24, 17 12:40 PM
... discovery has developed 18 properties, and the centerpiece of each is a golf course. To think they are going to develop, without a golf course, this "as of right" or "reduced impact alternative" makes no sense. The beach club is not enough of a pull to get people to buy in East Quogue - it is too far away and East Quogue lacks the necessary panache for their upscale clientele.

Despite "assurances" from the developer that the property will be built on, they will be taking a huge risk. ...more
By William Rodney (446), southampton on May 24, 17 4:30 PM
2 members liked this comment
I fully agree with Mark Hissey's point that long island is already fully developed over this lone acquifer .. he is right, thrre is just too much stress on it already. . Just1 source of water and too many already clamoring for it .. let them develop in Arizona so they don't have to fly all the way here
By dave h (173), calverton on May 24, 17 8:30 PM
So, Hissey claims the project "has been demonized as a result of the ignorance of a few". REALLY? Those "few" happen to include The East Quogue CAC, the East Quogue Civic, the Board of East Quogue Historical, the Coalition of Southampton Town CACs, Group for the East End, Mr. Amper of the Pine Barrens Society, Legislator Bridget Fleming ( and former Town Councilwoman), Assemblyman Thiele, and I could go on & on. Literally hundreds of people have come out against The Hills. These people have done ...more
By EastEndJoy (14), East Quogue on May 25, 17 6:28 PM
1 member liked this comment
Actually, in the public hearings alone there was better than 2:1 residents in favor of the project and against it. Roughly 155:70. And before you might claim otherwise, the names are all recorded. They are with few exceptions residents of Southampton Town. Close to 2000 people have signed on to support letters for the project -- every one being from the Town.

In fact, there are not hundreds who have come out. There are individuals who have opposed at the public hearings on multiple occasions. ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 25, 17 11:50 PM
2 members liked this comment
Even if you're correct about the support you've seen there is still no public benefit included in the PDD project...so it doesn't really matter.
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on May 26, 17 9:52 AM
1 member liked this comment
The Baswood system may help but has risks and does nothing for the golf course which, by far, is the most threatening component of the project since it represents about 3.5 million sq. ft. of pesticide hungry turf.

I couldn't find anything from Duchess County, but I did find something on this company from Houston Texas:

http://www.beveragedaily.com/Regulation-Safety/Hollywood-Monstrosity-Shocking-video-shows-Dr-Pepper-BioViper-spewing-foam
By sag2harbor (117), sag harbor on May 25, 17 9:19 PM
Please, be specific on why the golf course is such a danger. Go into details. And be precise. How do you justify the excellent long-established testing records of The Bridge and Sebonack? The records are for all to see. They are easy to request.

Please. Do it. And explain how those records support the threat that you refer to.
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 25, 17 11:56 PM
1 member liked this comment
You do realize, of course, that the system you cite in your link is not the same type of system proposed for the Hills, right? You also realize that a commercial beverage production facility will pose unique problems that a domestic sewage treatment system will not face, correct? Do you also understand that the problems associated with the industrial use you cite have been connected with power failures and lack of water pressure at that location?

All you needed to do to understand that ...more
By VOS (953), WHB on May 26, 17 2:29 AM
2 members liked this comment
Repeatedly comparing The Hills to SEBONACK and THE BRIDGE is crazy.

Sebonack was built on a previously developed property with dozens of structures and buried oil tanks. Not in the Pine Barrens. And, there were no homes there. It was a true summer camp.

The Bridge was built on the site of the Bridgehampton Race Track. Not in the Pine Barrens. And there were no homes there either.
AND, I was at a Town Board regular meeting where someone from The Bridge was asking for some ...more
By sag2harbor (117), sag harbor on May 26, 17 11:00 AM
1 member liked this comment
Mmm so the Hills is in the Compatible Growth Area of the pine barrens where development is permitted providing it meets PB requirements. Weesuck Creek and the school are not adjacent to the project because the LIRR tracks and Old Country Road as existing infrastructure clearly separate these properties. Comparisons made among all these courses were specific to the water quality issues, fertilizer, and management. If anything is damaging the pitch pines in the pine barrens, it's the southern pine ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 26, 17 7:38 PM
PESTICIDES are Toxic, and those working with them, around them and applying them wear hazmet suits. PERIOD. Enough said. They are applied to the turf by SPRAYING them thorugh large machines, making them airborne in our windy hamlet before they hit the ground. Then the equipment applying the pesticides need to be cleaned. If they have such " low potential for leaching" then why do their dangers need to be mitigated? See DEIS Integrated Turf Health Management Plan pages 26-27: "Turf Management ...more
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 26, 17 12:08 PM
1 member liked this comment
If you've studied toxicology, then you know everything is toxic. There are also three basic principles for evaluation: mass of the organism vs the amount of the toxin; the exposure pathway; and acute vs chronic exposure. The most dangerous compound many are exposed to is gasoline- yet many pump their own gas, with little concern because of the controls in place to protect the public. Turf sprayers are not "large machines," and if you looked at an agricultural sprayer its like comparing a Volkswagen ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 26, 17 6:40 PM
Well now I feel better, farmers who spray pesticides dress with hazmat gear in east Quogue so we should add a golf course to add to the toxic stuff being spread but without the benefit of growing crops that we eat. That's reasonable. As to turf sprayers not being large machines, you wanna get run over by one? Please tell us again. Why do we want to take down 100 acres of trees?
By CleanWater (108), East Quogue on May 26, 17 11:22 PM
1 member liked this comment
You should try reading the post again, this time with some assistance. I said they wear long sleeve shirts, pants, gloves and eye protection when using general use pesticides. Your pal Taz, incorrectly states hazmat suits are required. Why do "we" want to take down trees? I didn't know you owned the land.... the pine barrens law allows property owners to clear their land if located in the compatible growth area, providing pine barren clearing limits are met. A local golf course, Hampton Hills was ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 27, 17 5:11 AM
The only benefit to this project is for the freaking developers!
By bigfresh (2840), north sea on May 26, 17 12:54 PM
3 members liked this comment
It's winding down, folks. It's coming to the end, and these guys are in full desperation mode, starting to throw the Hail Mary passes. Fake new science like the treatment system reported in this article, and naked threats like the Pine Barrens credits scam reported in a later 27east piece ("Discovery Land Says It Can Use Pine Barrens Credits . . ." etc., 5/24/17, 1:39 PM).

It will probably be something else next week. There's no limit to their inventiveness or their gall. Big, big bucks ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 27, 17 5:02 PM
4 members liked this comment
Please understand the "like" above was inadvertent and certainly not representative of my viewpoint.

Your inability, unwillingness or simple stubbornness that does not enable you to understand the science behind the sewage treatment system, nitrogen mitigation and fertigation process, highly controlled use of turfgrass improvement substances and runoff capture does not mean it is "Fake new science," it means you prefer to deal with emotion rather than fact.

It is my understanding ...more
By VOS (953), WHB on May 27, 17 11:16 PM
I agree with points made by VOS and a few observations. I read the Press' editorial. I'm not impressed or convinced in part because they have no science editor. Another issue stems from Joe Shaw's post above in response to the TB comment regarding Kevin McAllister. Shaw states he had a "recent interview with Kevin." Really ? What else was discussed, especially since McAllister has far more scientific background than the editorial staff at the Press. The Press needs to be transparent and accurate ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 28, 17 7:06 AM
A property owner / developer is never guaranteed a change of zoning, a variance or more importantly a PDD! You claim that there's some community benefit to this project, perhaps a sidewalk and a few parking places in East Quogue and a bribe paid to the EQ school district benefits that small area, but the aquafer provides drinking water for more areas, where's the benefit for the rest of us? Will the developers guarantee to provide water to any and all effected if they ruin our sole source ?
By bigfresh (2840), north sea on May 28, 17 9:40 AM
1 member liked this comment
I think Mark Hissey is taking a standing 8 count on all the body shots he took in the debate above
By dave h (173), calverton on May 27, 17 11:13 PM
1 member liked this comment
Bigfish, the developer offered the SCWA area for a new well with excellent water quality , so the EXISTING well with elevated nitrogen can be discontinued. That is a guarantee if the project is approved.
By Lion (168), southampton on May 28, 17 10:18 AM
1 member liked this comment
.... will discovery be offering the same community benefits listed in the PDD to East Quogue when building as of right, 165 homes, or will they be off the table?
By William Rodney (446), southampton on May 28, 17 3:30 PM
PDD requires community benefits, AOR development does not.
By Lion (168), southampton on May 28, 17 4:25 PM
1 member liked this comment
If the aquafer is contaminated by this development , that will be a moot point. No guarantee that we will not lose our drinking water.
By bigfresh (2840), north sea on May 29, 17 7:07 AM
Lion, referring to the discontinuance of the existing well, you write, "That is a guarantee if the project is approved." "That is a guarantee," huh? Sounds like you're the developer or speaking as an authorized representative of the developer. Are you either of those things? You've been asked this before and ignored the question, so I guess I'll just keep asking since it's a perfectly reasonable question. How about an answer?
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 29, 17 11:58 AM
1 member liked this comment
The DEIS and developer have stated Land will be made available to the SCWA for a well field. That's no secret. Under the PDD law that commitment must be upheld "if approved."
In response to your persistent question, "you're not the boss of me."
Thank you and in remembrance of all, enjoy Memorial Day, please.
By Lion (168), southampton on May 29, 17 12:37 PM
Still no statement re your relationship as/to developer. Gee, I wonder why.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 29, 17 1:48 PM
And how exactly would proof be established that The Hills is the party responsible? The aquifer does not just lie underneath the property but rather extends throughout Long Island and therefore subject to all development in Long Island. The Hills project has absolute state-of-the-art water monitoring protocol which will produce ample evidence that it is not the source of contamination of the groundwater. Can you say the same for the over fertilized and vegetation bare farm fields or any other developments ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 29, 17 8:47 PM
Gee willigers TAZ. Still no admission your exaggerated and inaccurate statements about general uses pesticides were wrong.. I wonder why..
By Lion (168), southampton on May 29, 17 9:01 PM
Lion, you can dance all around this question, but you could answer it so easily just by a simple denial. It could be a single sentence, something like "I'm not connected to the developer by compensation or in any other way."

That would be the end of it, but you refuse to make that simple denial. So don't be surprised when people think that you must have some connection to Discovery Land Co., that you're just another Shill for The Hills.
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 31, 17 10:33 AM
... so just a plain vanilla housing development. Surely, you'll want to make enhancements to the village by way of donated benefits, otherwise those homes in the dusty pine barrens aren't gonna' sell.
By William Rodney (446), southampton on May 28, 17 4:46 PM
REMEMBER SANDY HOLLOW
DUMP STAN GLINKA
By pw herman (617), southampton on May 29, 17 4:47 PM
1 member liked this comment
Whatever is applied to the ground or buried ends up in the water supply.
By Mr. Z (9160), North Sea on May 29, 17 6:11 PM
1 member liked this comment
Unless it is captured and removed - which it will be at the Hills.

Why don't you, alphabet boy, Taz, Cleanwater, Turkey, et al read the DEIS before commenting? Almost every comment from you exposes your collective ignorance. A little education goes a long way; why not try it sometime?
By VOS (953), WHB on May 30, 17 3:07 AM
Gee, why does it need to be "captured and removed" if it is so safe? You fail to see your own contradictions. BTW, accidents happen (spills, etc.) during capture and removal, so the risk is at the Hills and its environs.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on May 30, 17 10:22 AM
1 member liked this comment
What is captured and removed is the nitrogen from the plume of water which currently exists. Emphasis -- CURRENTLY EXISTS. This protocol has absolutely no downside whatsoever. It is an effort to improve a situation that has been there for a long time and has contributed to the dire situation in the bay.

Please, take the time to do some homework on this. You are making statements that clearly show that you haven't taken the time to educate yourself on the project. This concept has been explained ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 30, 17 9:51 PM
How about you give it up, and preserve the land instead of exploiting it.
By Mr. Z (9160), North Sea on May 31, 17 5:33 AM
VOS, name calling? “Collective ignorance”. I’ve read the DEIS and have read the commentaries by the experts.

There is no place in the DEIS that says water is captured and removed. Nowhere. None of it.

But what an idea, lets capture the water and truck it off site, to some toxic wasteland. How much water would it be? Lets see, you line the whole golf course so no poisons get into the groundwater. So you line 100 acres of golf course and collect all the ...more
By CleanWater (108), East Quogue on May 30, 17 10:59 AM
And this statement is from fantasyland. Nobody is talking about carting off water.

YOU are the one making false statements. This statement alone makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. This is a scenario that you have created in your own mind and has not been proposed or even talked about. And your knowledge of agronomy and hydrology is completely non-existent. And I'm not going to let you get a pass on writing this rubbish.
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on May 30, 17 9:56 PM
Well CW, looks like you're wrong ....again. The quantity of water you calculated failed to account for evapotransipiration, so that's a major error. Second in groundwater hydrogeology the term "capture" means collection of a contaminant plume by a well designed to intercept it. Like when you suck Bosco off the bottom of your glass of chocolate milk thru a straw. May I suggest you TAZ and others spend a few decades in hazardous materials management and clean up before making yourselves look like ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 31, 17 4:40 AM
[1] So CleanWater is "wrong" just because Mark Hissey says he's wrong? All Mr. Hissey offers, as usual, is conclusory and ad hominem statements with no detail whatever to back them up. That's doesn't make CleanWater "wrong" regardless of what you and Mark Hissey may say.

[2] Lion, we're still waiting to know if you're a paid employee of or consultant to the developer here. Up above, at 10:33 AM today, I suggested that you seem to be just another Shill for The Hills, but that you can ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on May 31, 17 11:52 AM
What an amusing taunt TB. In your prejudice you deny what is unmistakably and factually wrong, but sell it as truth, as long as others agrees with your point of view. It's amazing you finished high school. How'd you do on true and false tests? A zealot, you seek to crush truth whilst waving a patriotic fist with quotes like that's how we do it in America. Lion posts were about the subject at hand-land use and scientific understanding. Not about a pro or con stance on the Hills. Narrow views and ...more
By Lion (168), southampton on May 31, 17 4:01 PM
I think what TB scrapped off the bottom of his/her shoe was your golf course plan....and thats where it belongs... on the bottom of his/her shoe :)
By toes in the water (514), southampton on May 31, 17 4:12 PM
... buying advertising space didn't get you guys very far now, did it?
By William Rodney (446), southampton on Jun 1, 17 9:12 AM
1 member liked this comment
Maybe Lion should spend some of that advertising $ on high school spelling classes himself. "Narrow views and prejudice due little to broaden knowledge." Do or due?
By Taz (228), East Quogue on Jun 1, 17 10:32 AM
So many distracting arguments about 'hydrology'.

Stay focused people, the PDD application has no community benefits.
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on May 31, 17 8:54 AM
1 member liked this comment
Arguments here about hydrology are instigated by those who refuse to acknowledge the science behind the actions taken by Discovery to mitigate existing and future conditions present at the site.

Beneficiaries of the project (incomplete as it is strictly from memory) in no particular order:

Southampton Town taxpayers
East Quogue School District
East Quogue Fire Department
East Quogue Chamber of Commerce
Suffolk County Water Authority
Westhampton Beach High School
Weesuck ...more
By VOS (953), WHB on May 31, 17 3:32 PM
I've read through the documentation associated with the project.

There are no community benefits that I have seen.
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on May 31, 17 4:15 PM
bribery and throwing money around is not a community benefit.
By bigfresh (2840), north sea on May 31, 17 5:58 PM
Thank you TurkeyBridge for standing up for Democrat values. I am glad to see that my party, the Democrat party, will have nothing to do with anything or anyone associated with the Hills.
By CleanWaters (57), Southampton on May 31, 17 1:44 PM
For the record, there are many Republicans against this project. They care about safe and clean water too.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on Jun 1, 17 10:34 AM
This is not a community project and does not provide community benefits commensurate with the development as the PDD legislation requires. This is a developer buying off the town. There are so many what-ifs....
No one should jeopardize our drinking water. Who to believe? Those paid by the developer? I don't think so.
By Marrrmin (4), Hampton bays on Jun 1, 17 9:28 AM
1 member liked this comment
Lion. I love that you you are so well informed about the project and have done such a great job in refuting some of the inaccurate arguments being made on here. But respectfully, I would ask that you to refrain from any personal attacks on people. Facts are one thing and emotion is another. Science and rationale are on the side of The Hills and that is enough. I have no right whatsoever to demand anything from you of course, but rest assured that The Hills is on the right side of history.

For ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on Jun 1, 17 11:43 AM
With all due (not "do") respect, I've maintained a civil discourse. Although I have found comments directed at me offensive, if I've offended others, my apologies. That said, I too have asked (in previous posts) that personal labels be stopped, however some posters continue. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
So please include them in your quest to stop personal attacks.
By Lion (168), southampton on Jun 1, 17 2:36 PM
wow, the above is the strangest exchange i have ever seen.

Fortunately it seems like many many people have come together in harmony over the realization that there are NO community benefits included in the PDD application and that we dont really need to focus on any nitpicking or name calling. There is already enough clear info to reject the application.

:) Hooray East Quogue !
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on Jun 1, 17 3:35 PM
Thanks Lion. You've been incredibly honorable despite the flak that you, I and others have received for merely sticking your head out for what it right. I've hoped that the discourse could be civil and rational, but it is clear that many opponents of The Hills are neither. A case in point is this post of 3:35 which flatly ignores a point you have brought up on many occasions and have clearly answered. There is no rationale or logic from people like that. The answer is as clear as day and yet they ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on Jun 1, 17 3:55 PM
keep the faith baby... or as translated- Keep calm and carry on...
By Lion (168), southampton on Jun 1, 17 4:02 PM
... sorry lion, you had to be caged.
By William Rodney (446), southampton on Jun 1, 17 4:03 PM
...never happen, besides lions are most dangerous in captivity, WR.
By Lion (168), southampton on Jun 1, 17 4:27 PM
.and we all pile on the first one that breaks into that Born Free song-
By Lion (168), southampton on Jun 1, 17 4:29 PM
Despite continued bickering it seems like many many people have come together in harmony over the realization that there are NO community benefits included in the PDD application and that we dont really need to focus on any nitpicking or name calling. There is already enough clear info to reject the application.

:) East Quogue, Southampton Town, Thank you for all coming together.
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on Jun 1, 17 9:27 PM
1 member liked this comment
Creating your own narrative and facts again? You placing the word "no" repeatedly in capitals does not eliminate what is on the record for anyone to see.

The town has not come together. You are part of a loud, persistent, non science base minority. The majority have spoken and they aren't with you. A prime example of that fact was the 20 or so people who showed up at Town Hall to harass and malign Jay Schneiderman. I'd compare that to the 150+ speakers who supported the project in the four ...more
By Mark Hissey (149), East Quogue on Jun 2, 17 9:44 AM
We did come together, you just weren't invited.

And you're right, i'm not talking about science, i'm talking about community benefits, which your pdd application has none of (which is why it will be rejected, regardless of any science).

Enjoy your weekend
By adlkjd923ilifmac.aladfksdurwp (374), southampton on Jun 2, 17 11:22 AM
1 member liked this comment
SH PRESS letter to Editor this week:

Letter Crass Display

I applaud the well thought out and even-handed scrutiny of “The Hills at Southampton” project presented in the Press editorial [“Drawing A Line,” May 25]. It is clear, with the kudos given to Discovery Land Company where warranted, as well as a recognition of the environmental concerns that pervade this project, that common sense and science won the day in this editorial. The risks to our health and ...more
By FiddlerCrab (89), Westhampton Beach on Jun 2, 17 3:06 PM
Sag Harbor Express May 17, 2017

In East Quogue, the Hills, a PDD that calls for the construction of 118 houses and a private golf course, has drawn vehement opposition from residents who have, among other things, cited concerns it will lead to groundwater contamination.

When Mr. Schneiderman, an Independence Party member cross-endorsed by the Democrats, was elected in 2015, he joined his Democratic colleagues on the board in calling for a year-long moratorium on PDDs.

This ...more
By CleanWater (108), East Quogue on Jun 2, 17 3:14 PM
1 member liked this comment
(1) 
“Community benefits or amenities” shall mean open space, housing for persons of low or moderate income, parks, elder care, day care, or other specific physical, social or cultural amenities, or cash in lieu thereof, of benefit to the residents of the affected community or communities and commensurate with the benefit to the applicant.
[Added 10-26-2010 by L.L. No. 33-2010]

The Hills meets the clearly stated criteria of the binding law regardless of whether ...more
By VOS (953), WHB on Jun 6, 17 5:44 PM
... " commensurate with the benefit to the applicant".
By William Rodney (446), southampton on Jun 7, 17 7:25 AM
The next para of the soon to be discarded PDD legislation reads:

Any monies collected pursuant to the "cash in lieu of" alternative shall be placed in a dedicated account, restricted to only those uses specifically delineated within the legislation authorizing the planned development district, and may only be allocated pursuant to a duly adopted Town Board resolution.

So, not real estate taxes to be paid by future buyers at "build out", not salaries to be paid to employees, someday, ...more
By CleanWater (108), East Quogue on Jun 7, 17 4:49 PM
And you would be wrong. Again.

Parking lots, golf outings, school aid, coastal water research, scholarship programs, etc all are described as "specific physical, social or cultural amenities." I have seen nothing in the DEIS that indicates any required community benefits will be met by "cash in lieu thereof."

You can cast aside any respect for "the soon to be discarded PDD legislation" but you also must realize this project must be judged by that very PDD law currently in force. ...more
By VOS (953), WHB on Jun 8, 17 2:01 AM
When a developer applies for a PDD, there are NO GUARANTEES that it will be approved , your thinly veiled threat of legal action if The Hills application is denied is just the latest scare tactic employed by Hissey & Co.
By bigfresh (2840), north sea on Jun 8, 17 5:40 AM
We always knew this developer would sue if his application was denied -- that's a given -- but we also knew that his pro forma suit would have little chance of success in court. But, but, but, if our Supervisor or any of our Town Board members yield to pressure and start expressing their opinions in advance, that's a violation of the process and it puts a potent weapon in the hands of the developer. Advance opinions stated by anyone on the Board immediately transform the developer's weak lawsuit ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on Jun 8, 17 11:22 AM
... there is no such thing as an " over-pushy" anti-hills crowd. The danger here is listening to the "call you next week crowd" who avoid pressuring those who make decisions and don't understand the ominous threat to our environment and water supply associated with this project, or who may be in favor of it. This thing must be shut down - by any means necessary.
By William Rodney (446), southampton on Jun 9, 17 2:09 AM
And would you shut it down by a means which is wide open to reversal by a court decision? I wouldn't. Sure, "over-pushy" was an ill-chosen term and I'll take it back with regret. I also fully understand and sympathize with your impatience on this. I'm impatient, too, but I know from long experience that what I wrote above is true -- if these Board members speak out early, it gives Discovery a powerful weapon to overturn any negative decision. That will put us back to Square One, and I don't ...more
By Turkey Bridge (1695), Quiogue on Jun 9, 17 12:47 PM
The Town Board should move forward at the earliest possible legal moment and move for a vote. Enough procrastinating. Do not send back the FEIS as incomplete for another filing. Accept it as submitted by this very experienced developer and vote on it as is. It is not the job of the board to do DLC's work for them.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on Jun 10, 17 1:07 PM
... what you describe here is complacency, which is the reason Hillary is sitting poolside in Chappaqua staring into space and shaking her head.
By William Rodney (446), southampton on Jun 10, 17 12:48 PM
1 member liked this comment
I hit like in error. Let's please leave the election out of this, there are many Trump supporters against this PDD, no need to alienate any of our team.
By Taz (228), East Quogue on Jun 10, 17 1:10 PM
Remnants, rolls, area rugs