WELCOME GUEST  |  LOG IN
Lawn Doctor, Hamptons, Lawn Care, Mosquito Control, Tick Control. Lawn Maintenance
27east.com

Story - News

Dec 23, 2014 10:47 AMPublication: The Southampton Press

Southampton Town Planning Board Opposes Redevelopment Plan For Shinnecock Canal

Dec 23, 2014 11:18 AM

The Southampton Town Planning Board has refused to endorse the designs of a development plan calling for the rehabilitation of the Canoe Place Inn and the construction of 37 townhouses along the eastern bank of the Shinnecock Canal in Hampton Bays.

Echoing the concerns of residents who protested the plans at three public hearings over the past two months, Planning Board members said that while the plans for the CPI were generally good, the privatization of the canal’s eastern shoreline, combined with the density of the housing development, were black marks that went against decades of town planning forethought.

At its December 18 meeting, the Planning Board adopted a joint statement of overall disapproval for the plan, which would allow for the expansion and renovation of the CPI, and a rezoning of more than 4 acres on the eastern bank of the canal. Their response also offered some recommendations should the plan go forward as proposed.

“Our biggest concern was the loss of [resort waterfront business] zoning along the canalfront,” said Planning Board Chairman Dennis Finnerty in a phone interview following last Thursday’s vote. “It runs counter to the town’s planning goals of fostering public use and public access to the waterfront by privatizing land.

“We can’t support it in its original form,” he continued, “which certainly leaves room for modifications.”

Five of the seven members of the board voted to approve the board’s position; Mr. Finnerty, John Blaney, John Zuccarelli, Cathie Gandel and Jacqui Lofaro signed off on the document. Board members Philip Keith, who spoke favorably of the project designs at the board’s November 11 meeting, and George Skidmore, a Hampton Bays businessman, were not present for last week’s vote. Mr. Keith writes a column for The Press.

“The specifics of the proposal cannot be discussed without first addressing the broader issue that this plan constitutes a significant privatization of the Shinnecock Canal,” the board’s recommendation to the Town Board states. “While it is obviously private property, the current [resort waterfront business] zoning on the waterfront provides opportunities for businesses to operate and provide water dependent and water enhanced uses. Changing the zoning in this location seems contrary to the state goals of the Comprehensive Plan that places priority on enhancing RWB zoning and promoting public use of the water.”

Some supporters of the project, Town Board members included, have said that the decking now overlooking the canal does not constitute valuable public access because, prior to the closing of Tide Runners, access to the boardwalk required patronizing the restaurant.

The Planning Board’s comments are only advisory to the Town Board on planned development district applications and do not bind lawmakers’ own votes. Four of the five Town Board members must vote in favor of a PDD application for it to win approval. They are scheduled to vote on the application, filed by developers Gregg and Mitchell Rechler, on Tuesday, January 13.

Last week all five members of the Town Board spoke favorably about the project brought to them by Rechler Equity Partners, though some professed to have not made up their minds yet. Most pointed to the rehabilitation of the CPI, the installation of state-of-the-art wastewater treatment systems and the influx of some $650,000 in annual school tax revenue that would benefit the Hampton Bays School District as benefits that justify deviating from current zoning and the recommendations of numerous planning studies that recommend keeping the eastern side of the canal as a commercial site.

The recommendation from the Planning Board also states that the proposed density of the 37 townhouses appears “excessive and out of scale for this relatively small parcel and in comparison to the density patterns within Hampton Bays, noting that this is already the most dense hamlet in Southampton.”

“We were definitely concerned about the density, especially for Hampton Bays,” Ms. Gandel said this week.

The board did give a nod of approval to the proposed restoration of the Canoe Place Inn, another benefit that is being touted by the developers, who are also cousins. “If done correctly, with adequate detailing as to what decisions are being made and why, the building could potentially be landmarked, even after the fact,” the board statement reads.

If the Town Board were to approve the two separate PDD applications that make up the project, the planners recommended that the final law be tweaked to ensure better public access and better energy efficiency in some of the structures. The board recommended a public promenade be created along the entire frontage of the Shinnecock Canal and the installation of additional public parking, citing a community goal of the Hampton Bays Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement that was completed in 2011. The project, as proposed, calls for a public access road and parking lot at one end of the property and a 220-foot-long floating dock along the canal waters, essentially mirroring what exists currently.

The board also said that five cottages on the CPI property, due to be renovated as part of the project, should be rebuilt to updated energy efficient standards.

Additionally, the board suggested that the proposed complex of septic treatment systems for the townhouses could be built at the former police barrack on North Road, instead of on a commercially zoned Rechler property at the intersection of North Road and Montauk Highway, as the application suggests.

If the Town Board signs off next month, the application would then return to the Planning Board for site plan review, at which time that board can require specific landscaping, lighting and parking designs, and also make final decisions on the waste treatment systems.

You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

Well I heard that Jacksons has sold. Could just be a rumor but What will it be? Condo or Marina or a Condo Marina???
By North Sea Citizen (343), North Sea on Dec 23, 14 1:12 PM

Now that is the perfect place for a Gosmans dock type of a project, Calm water beautiful sunsets and room to breath, someone ( Gregg and Mitchell Rechler ?) could buy out the handful of property's to the West all the way to the bridge and maybe even the water troubled homes to the East and create an amazing ...more
By joe hampton (3353), southampton on Dec 23, 14 3:35 PM
Do you mean the cottages to the north up to the bridge?

Jackson's is on Teepee. The houses on Sagamore are to the west.
By Mr. Z (11376), North Sea on Dec 23, 14 5:28 PM
Great Idea Joe, Kudos to you for thinking out of the box. It really is an amazing thought, but as you can see It dose not matter where you want to put anything new, they don't want it, they seem to like it looking like a dilapidated S#^+ hole

As far as the 37 homes being to much density for HB, You could eliminate far more density from the hamlet by enforcing single family home laws.
By 27dan (2711), Shinnecock Hills on Dec 23, 14 9:52 PM
I don’t have enough fingers and toes to the “Jackson’s has been sold” line! It seems to come and go again with the tide, nothing against the idea, but the land is low and frequently underwater on east winds, and they do store a lot of boats off season and on.
By alhavel (50), Hampton Bays on Dec 23, 14 10:02 PM
2 members liked this comment
Jacksons is full of oil and needs 1m to clean up. Could "joe" be the same "joe" that has an investment in the 3 dilapidated houses on what is now "wetlands". Hes been trying to put a marina in there for years. One angle after another. Burn it down Joe like you first intended.

By stormysea (2), hampton bays on Dec 30, 14 12:52 PM
If you read my suggestion It has nothing to do with a marina, It has to do with a Gosmans Dock type project for Hampton Bays and would clean up the area not add more oil, bottom paint and soap and remember the oil and chemicals are coming from Hampton Water craft and Spellmans as well as Jakcsons
By joe hampton (3353), southampton on Dec 31, 14 1:43 PM
Joe Hampton, I am not sure if Jackson's is again for sale or not. I know that they have been wanting to sell and the last deal fell through. At least last I knew. I do agree that it would be nice if the area could be cleaned up. I find it interesting that the silly people running around saying that the canal will be lost if the MPDD is passed, say zip when marinas on both sides of the canal seem to grow before our very eyes.

Again, we need to be proactive, rather than reactive. Those ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 4, 15 10:06 AM
Excellent! The planning board is recognizing this as two separate projects - one east of the canal and one west. There is absolutely no reason serving the public to consider both projects as one.
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 23, 14 4:33 PM
3 members liked this comment
Finally! Someone with a voice of reason. Are you listening Anna and friends?
By pcone (28), hampton bays on Dec 23, 14 4:40 PM
2 members liked this comment
Guess planning board didn't care about the antiquated cess pools that the old restaurants used that fowled the canal and bay, nor do they seem to care that any "as of right" business on the east side will continue to have nitrogen seep into the Canal from their septic systems. Town homes' system will reduce nitrogen to unprecedented levels and since when does planning board endorse ( or not endorse) proposals?
By goteam (3), islip on Dec 23, 14 4:46 PM
The leaching of pools into the entire bayfront outweighs what leaches into the canal by a long shot. At least the canal is flushed, and the tides exchange with the ocean. There are place more isolated which are in far worse shape. Reference this October article in the Press:

http://www.27east.com/news/article.cfm/General-Interest-Southampton/84789/Stony-Brook-Scientists-Find-Many-Maladies-For-Long-Island-Waters
By Mr. Z (11376), North Sea on Dec 23, 14 5:32 PM
So because it isn't the worst place we just don't care about the nitrogen?

Goteam, I was wondering about the planning board endorsing or not endorsing. I've never seen any of them at the public hearings. If they had concerns I'm curious why they waited so long to voice them.
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 23, 14 9:20 PM
You're talking out of your hat. The state and the county regulate sanitation issues regarding the canal and bay, not the planning board. If you really want to bark, find the right tree.
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 23, 14 11:15 PM
yes I am still confused by the 2 headlines on front page ..
..
Southampton Town Planning Board Opposes Redevelopment Plan For Shinnecock Canal
>

Shinnecock Canal Redevelopment Plan Has Strong Support Among Southampton Town Board
..
did something happen to sway opinion? I havnt figured it out yet
By david h (405), southampton on Dec 24, 14 8:42 AM
It’s Christmas, go look under their tree, and while your at it check the stockings with care, too. No telling what’s stuffed in them to make them full, (hint. it’s probably green).
By alhavel (50), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 14 7:32 PM
Again your insinuations. Do you have any shred of evidence to support this or just your guess?
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:59 AM
It is confusing if you read the article from the week before, where there was support to this week where there isn't.

I am especially confused by this...

"Additionally, the board suggested that the proposed complex of septic treatment systems for the townhouses could be built at the former police barrack on North Road, instead of on a commercially zoned Rechler property at the intersection of North Road and Montauk Highway, as the application suggests."

How would the Rechler's ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 9:26 AM
It is confusing if you read the article from the week before, where there was support to this week where there isn't.

I am especially confused by this...

"Additionally, the board suggested that the proposed complex of septic treatment systems for the townhouses could be built at the former police barrack on North Road, instead of on a commercially zoned Rechler property at the intersection of North Road and Montauk Highway, as the application suggests."

How would the Rechler's ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 9:26 AM
The president of the planning board is a vacuum cleaner salesman, do I need to say more
By cottagekeeper (7), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 14 8:03 AM
1 member liked this comment
Doesn't mean he sucks...
By Toma Noku (616), uptown on Dec 24, 14 9:45 AM
I actually don't remember liking that...I know pretty much nothing of Dennis Finnerty, it must have been an accident.

Your comment though is pretty funny. Rude, but funny.




By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 14 3:03 PM
I actually don't remember liking that...I know pretty much nothing of Dennis Finnerty, it must have been an accident.

Your comment though is pretty funny. Rude, but funny.




By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 14 3:03 PM
Glad to hear the voices of reason coming out. Hopefully they can flip 2 members of the Town Board.

If the Rechler's wanted to build new restaurants on the east side with apartments above - I'd be all for that and I imagine the community would as well. Even if they got some density bonus or eased height restrictions to make it more worth their while. But to completely replace those restaurants and the public boat slips with a private development is just gross.
By Nature (2966), Southampton on Dec 24, 14 10:18 AM
4 members liked this comment
It's nice that you wouldn't mind if they built what you want...surely you realize that as of right they aren't really going to care what you want. Stopping this project isn't going to mean that the community is happy. Just that they'll have something else to be unhappy about.


Oh and more nitrogen in our water. Can't forget how lovely those cesspools are for our bays that we are so concerned about.
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 24, 14 3:09 PM
"Surely you realize that as of right they"...cannot build residential housing in the Resort Waterfront Business zone?
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 24, 14 3:18 PM
1 member liked this comment
Surely you realize that "as of right" they could build a number of other things that would not necessarily result in the cutsie Gosman-esque shopping experience some seem to want. How about motels, or a nightclub or two, instead? RWB allows. Noise, traffic, and pollution could once again provide a "lively resort scene." Yahoo!!!
Folks should be careful what they wish for.
By PQ1 (167), hampton bays on Dec 25, 14 12:37 PM
1 member liked this comment
There are many, many houses sitting atop underlying RWB right now. Good thing all that area is not built-out according to its commercial potential.
So what's the difference if the zoning changed to RWB after they were built or if, as in this case, the zoning changes before?
By PQ1 (167), hampton bays on Dec 25, 14 12:48 PM
The master plan has recognized the unique advantages waterfront business can provide for the economic well being and vibrancy of the community. What's gone is gone but that does not in any way negate the deleterious affect losing further proper RWB uses would have, in fact it makes retaining existing commercial uses all the more important. There is absolutely nothing wrong with well run businesses that fit the definitions allowed in RWB zoning such as the two restaurants and fishing station this ...more
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 25, 14 9:07 PM
2 members liked this comment
So bb, where does your "waste" go when you flush?
By Nature (2966), Southampton on Dec 26, 14 9:36 AM
Did you have a point?

Everyone is so concerned about our waters, yet are against a project that will protect them.
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:22 AM
Who forced what out? The property was sold.

One restaurant moved, the fishing "station" was already closed for years and TideRunners isn't a great loss to many. Less drunks, less noise, less traffic.

By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:54 AM
The owners, the Rechlers, forced out three thriving businesses. If you're not aware that the fishing station, Whitewater, was in operation until their lease was terminated and One North moved for the same reason why should anyone believe your characterization of Tiderunners?

Maybe not a loss to you personally, but it appears that you hadn't been in that area in years anyway.
By VOS (1199), WHB on Jan 2, 15 10:14 AM
Adding 37 Town Houses (Aka Boat Houses) with 37 Dishwashers, 74+ Toilets, 74+ showers and tubs, 111+ sinks and 37+ washing machines vs a few small bathrooms and kitchens used in the summer is a bad tradeoff no matter who is being paid by the Rechlers to do the waste study. The only thing being pumped up the hill is the gray water the rest of the waste is sitting in a large number of septic rings on the old "Tideunners" site. Also, covering 90% of the site with houses and paved parking lots etc. ...more
By Ernie (86), Hampton Bays on Jan 2, 15 12:26 PM
1 member liked this comment
More BS by BB. The White Water Bait Store was in operation until the Rechlers would no longer renew the lease they were the last business operating on the site. Maybe the people who want to restore the CPI White Elephant should go out and enjoy the waterfront restaurants a little.
By Ernie (86), Hampton Bays on Jan 2, 15 12:33 PM
Whitewater left as did North One, before Tiderunners. When you rent, you always run the risk of the owners ending your lease. Not quite the same as the vision you portray of "forcing" them out. The property was for sale, anyone - or you - could have purchased it. You didn't. They didn't. Hence they lost their lease.

North One knew when they rented that they would not be there for too long that was agreed to when they rented the place.

Maybe the people who want to restore ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 4, 15 10:03 AM
So now the advisory board empowered to determine the rational development of the town also opposes Rechlerville. One would think that their opposition would be decisive. Unfortunately for us all, that is not so. When this proposal comes up for final approval before the town board, the vote will be a clean sweep, 5-0 in favor. The Republican board members, Scalera and Glinka, and the “Independen(ce)” supervisor, ATH, can, of course, be expected to vote their pro-developer prejudices, ...more
By highhatsize (4038), East Quogue on Dec 24, 14 11:28 AM
2 members liked this comment
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By They call me (2696), southampton on Dec 24, 14 3:23 PM
2 members liked this comment
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 27, 14 1:03 AM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 27, 14 11:43 AM
1 member liked this comment
Would the editor kindly explain the censorship policy of 27East?
By VOS (1199), WHB on Dec 29, 14 6:31 PM
"the advisory board empowered to determine the rational development"

I don't see where their recommendation to build the Nitrex system (the one they voted against) on property the developer doesn't own, to be terribly "rational".

How exactly would that work?
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 9, 15 11:31 AM
Planning Board's weigh in on site plans not on changes of zone. Headline is absurd.
By goteam (3), islip on Dec 24, 14 4:02 PM
3 members liked this comment
Lest ye forget, gentrification is not solely an urban process.

Be careful what you wish for...
By Mr. Z (11376), North Sea on Dec 25, 14 12:11 AM
1 member liked this comment
Gentrification is a general term for the arrival of wealthier people in an existing urban district, a related increase in rents and property values, and changes in the district's character and culture

Sounds exactly like what Hampton Bays needs !
By 27dan (2711), Shinnecock Hills on Dec 27, 14 3:49 PM
1 member liked this comment
You missed the other part of it.

"Middle class" people being fiscally evicted from the area who have called it their home for decades or even generations.

"De pecuniae" segregation in action...
By Mr. Z (11376), North Sea on Dec 30, 14 10:33 AM
The comment of Dennis Finnerty being a vacuum salesman as a belittling comment is wrong. He owns one of the largest central vac company on the East End , and works very hard at it. His living relies on new projects to get his work. He is always polite, and respectful to people that come before the board. He has good planning sense, and he could be right about this application. If you agree with him or not his decisions are made for the right reason.
By chief1 (2725), southampton on Dec 25, 14 12:27 PM
Ok, so he does sell vacuums. Why was that comment "belittling"? Seems more like an attempt at a joke. What I find so interesting is some automatically took it as an insult and feel the need to defend him vehemently! Why?

Of all the insulting things said here, that really doesn't seem to be one.

Just curious...how does selling central vacs give one the experience to be on the Planning Board? I never quite understood the "qualifications" of these appointees.
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:50 AM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By bigblue84 (89), Hampton Bays on Dec 26, 14 1:12 PM
1 member liked this comment
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By 27dan (2711), Shinnecock Hills on Dec 26, 14 4:59 PM
The solution to the problem is to reverse the plan. Replace the CPI with a new building with a facade that looks like the CPI. Design a building that takes advantage of the CPI view of the canal. Allow about 35 town houses or boat houses or time shares to replace the CPI. Then keep the resort waterfront business zoning on the "Tidewater", 1 North, Whitewater business side and develop an as of right restaurant or catering hall that can be used by the public if they choose to patronize the business. ...more
By Ernie (86), Hampton Bays on Dec 26, 14 3:48 PM
Ernie, You mean the original plan that know one wanted

Better Idea, The Reacher's have played the opponents Stupid games long enough, They have jumped through hoops for 4 years and have earned the right to build.

Then take a look at Joe's plan let the Reacher's buy out Jacksons Marina and build a Gosmans Dock type project that would attract the right kind of tourists and put them in a place with calm water,sunset views,and safe docking for all, You could offer Dave first dibs to ...more
By 27dan (2711), Shinnecock Hills on Dec 26, 14 5:11 PM
One of the criticisms that is floating around is that the rehabilitation of the Canoe Place Inn will not be accurate enough. Your solution to that is to tear it down completely? You continual spout off about the cost of the Inn project not being enough, the Inn being a "White Elephant" and not able to be rehabilitated. I never have heard though what your expertise in this area is. How is it that you know more than the architects and engineers?

While you may not care for the Inn Ernie, ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:46 AM
The original plan to build 75 time shares on the CPI site was too dense from the beginning like everything else the Rechlers propose. That said downsizing that plan is a better alternative than giving up the Shinnecock canal to 37 Boat Houses and building a septic system in the middle of Shinnecock Hills. The list of useless projects already proposed by the Historical Society is beyond belief. Every one of these projects results in an empty building left to deteriorate in the middle of town or at ...more
By Ernie (86), Hampton Bays on Jan 1, 15 9:07 PM
So " based on conversations with several local builders." you know that the project is "under funded". Well that has to be gospel. Exactly why would the Rechlers want to put themselves in a position where they say they can do something for less than they can? The east side project is dependent on the Inn project going forward. Of course, I have never actually heard them say an actual dollar amount, nor would I expect them to since prices change. Often. Its interesting that your sources don't ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 4, 15 9:56 AM
Do the math - the 5 cottages at 1000 sq ft each plus the CPI at 45,000 sq ft gives you a total of 50,000 sq ft. The budget for the entire CPI project the last time I looked was about 4 Million. Depending on how much is allocated to roads, parking lots, landscaping etc the price will be less than $80 per sq ft. More like $75 per sq ft. Look at what it costs to build a new house in Hampton Bays. If the new Boat Houses cost $900,000 and are 2000 sq ft the cost per sq ft is $450. Let's assume 50% profit ...more
By Ernie (86), Hampton Bays on Jan 5, 15 12:16 PM
1 member liked this comment
Why does it matter what this guy Doscher complains about? We can not allow curmudgeons to rule our societyIs there or is there not a history of Tiderunners being cited for noise law violations? How many times were they convicted? It is my understanding that live music outside at Tiderunners always ended at nine PM; that hardly seems to create an oppressive nuisance.

Business plans do not have a place in this argument; the Town has no obligation to help any developer create a profit at ...more
By VOS (1199), WHB on Jan 5, 15 12:26 PM
1 member liked this comment
Can you show us where you get this 4 million dollar figure from?

I'd hazard a guess that the Rechlers are more than aware of what needs to be done on the site. That's why they hire professionals Ernie.

My understanding is it will be open 12 months a year...unlike the Tide Runners was. Is there a problem with that?

I'm still curious why you believe the Rechlers would spend years and millions of dollars on plans which they can not achieve. Why are they doing this?
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 7, 15 9:24 PM
I don't know where Ernie gets his figures or if they are even relevant but I do have an answer to your final question that many people fear.

I was last in that building over thirty years ago and its condition at that time did not make it a good candidate for rehabilitation. It may be possible but will certainly require an exorbitant amount of money to accomplish. The eastern half of the building is constructed on piers as opposed to a full foundation and may no longer meet codes for ...more
By VOS (1199), WHB on Jan 7, 15 10:14 PM
2 members liked this comment
How do you figure they allowed and encouraged the deterioration of these properties? They shut down the Inn as a gesture of good faith when asked by the Town because the neighbors didn't want the bar noise. They did not renew leases on the basis that they were moving forward with this plan. Perhaps the town should have worked more quickly to see this through and given them an answer.

The foundation is "hollow clay block"? My understanding from others who have worked in the building ...more
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 8, 15 3:45 PM
Approve something!! Anything is better then what is there now.
By westhamptonboy (227), Westhampton on Dec 27, 14 9:36 AM
Personally, I love the Bellport look and feel of Hamptons Bays. I don't see the issue to keep it the way it looked 60 years ago.
By whatapity (106), Tuckahoe on Dec 28, 14 4:00 PM
1 member liked this comment
I have a question and i apologize if it was covered already. The property to the north east side of Montauk highway belongs to who? Its not the Rechlers. Also, is that not now considered wetlands? I am referring to the property across from Cowfish. I have heard a few stories about the property including one where the owners intend to burn down the wetlands. I know the "official" LLC owners but I also know that the people behind this property are some very unsavory characters.
By stormysea (2), hampton bays on Dec 30, 14 12:16 PM
I'm not sure who owns that property now. I do know that those who are so outraged at the so called "loss" on the Rechler property would be well advised to be proactive when it comes to preserving that piece of property. If it needs to be preserved, do it now before it is sold.
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Dec 31, 14 8:57 AM
The Rechlers knew what they bought and what they could do with the property within its current zoning. However that doesn't provide them with enough of a greedy return which borders on rape. Raping us the year round residents so they can buy another plane and fly off into the sunset. Build a conforming use to the zoning and be good neighbors and you bought it so long ago, so cheap, that you will still get a good return on investment. The last few weeks and months Riverhead sewage district has pumped ...more
By North Sea Citizen (538), North Sea on Jan 1, 15 8:05 AM
1 member liked this comment
There’s a drainage grate at the bottom Old Canoe Place Rd. Pump s**t up, and it will come tumbling down.
By alhavel (50), Hampton Bays on Jan 8, 15 12:19 PM
1 member liked this comment
http://2fv5yv6raql3hf1h3ayvgp18.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/muni/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2012/03/Muffin-monster-30005.jpg

This baby will grind it up so it doesn’t clog the grate too.
By alhavel (50), Hampton Bays on Jan 8, 15 12:23 PM
Why is the town board even voting on this? This decision should be put to a referendum vote for the residents of the Hamlet of Hampton Bays to decide .. Four members living in different hamlets throughout the town plus Mr. Glinka shouldn't be the deciding decision on this Hamlet changing project. There are many issues here which .gives us the feeling of deception, half truths and patronage.. Let the residents vote on the direction we would like our Hamlet to take. Real quick, the constant talk ...more
By JohnTedesco (5), Hampton Bays, New York on Jan 11, 15 1:01 AM
1 member liked this comment
They even put in a retaining wall to keep the effluent flowing in the direction of the creek. the other side (south) will get the same treatment. there is very little tidal action up that end, and no water to flush it either, in the end it will look like Lake Winniehaha late Sunday afternoon, just a broken swear pipe for those to enjoy.
By alhavel (50), Hampton Bays on Jan 11, 15 8:44 AM
People are unhappy with cesspools at Allen's acres, and rightfully so. But unhappy with a Nitrex system that will address the problem at the canal, property. We can't have a water treatment plant because neighbors won't like it. Yet we can't have cesspools. Pick a side people!
By bb (884), Hampton Bays on Jan 11, 15 11:39 AM
8k run & 3 mile walk, Agawam Park, Southampton Rotary Club fundraiser