Proposal To Close Pond Lane to Vehicles Emerges as Divisive Issue Among Southampton Village Residents

In the weeks since members of the Lake Agawam Conservancy and renowned architect and landscape designer Peter Marino unveiled plans for a grand reimagining of 11 acres of land along Pond Lane near the lake, including a Marino-designed public garden, one particular aspect of that plan has emerged as a divisive issue among residents of Southampton Village.

The proposed closure to vehicular traffic on Pond Lane has raised the ire of some residents, who say they support the plans for the gardens but do not support the closure of the road, which follows the northwest side of the lake before taking a 90-degree turn onto Ox Pasture Road, into the estate section of the village.

The plans for the gardens and the 11 acres of property on Pond Lane are still in the early stages and were presented to the public for the first time at a Southampton Village Board work session on August 22 by members of the conservancy, a private group founded by homeowners surrounding the lake in summer 2019 with a mission of restoring the health of the polluted water body at the center of Southampton Village.

The $20 million plan — $10 million for construction, and $10 million for an endowment to fund maintenance, all raised via private donations — would amount to an expansion of the existing Agawam Park, and would create waterfront access for the public, but allowing for pedestrian and bicycle access only on Pond Lane, although emergency vehicles would still be able to use the roadway when necessary.

At the work session, Lake Agawam Conservancy President Bob Giuffra touted the benefits the park would provide, key among them preventing development on the 11 acres along Pond Lane and instead preserving it for the public for generations to come. Closing the road would allow for the creation of a bioswale and vegetative buffer, which would reduce the runoff that goes into the lake from the roadway, he said.

The plan for the expansion of the park and creation of the gardens and waterfront access started to come together at the end of 2021, when the Paulson Family Foundation bought both the 4.8-acre lot at 137 Pond Lane and the adjacent 3.6-acre lot at 153 Pond Lane — the former Wyman estate — for $25 million, with the intent of rescuing it from potential development and securing it for the public. Meanwhile, the Southampton Town Community Preservation Fund had already purchased 2.9 acres at 111 Pond Lane, adjacent to the Paulson Foundation parcels.

The first step in the plan moving forward is for the CPF to acquire the lot at 137 Pond Lane from the foundation, which it is prepared to do, and Paulson has agreed to sell the lot to the town for the same price he paid for it. He has also stated that he will donate the other lot.

Both Paulson and Southampton Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman have stated that they are not only supportive of the plan to close Pond Lane to vehicle traffic but that the elimination of that aspect of the plan could amount to a dealbreaker for the entire project.

The CPF acquisition of the 137 Pond Lane parcel also is key in another way. The village recently secured $10 million in grant funding to purchase an algae harvester to extract millions of gallons of water from the lake daily, remove more than 90 percent of the nitrogen and phosphorous that feeds the harmful algae blooms, and return the cleaned water to the lake, which experts like Dr. Chris Gobler of Stony Brook University say is a crucial step in restoring the health of the lake.

The village plans to house that harvester at Doscher Park, a CPF-owned property adjacent to the village parking lot near Agawam Park. In order to put the harvester there, there needs to be a swap of another CPF parcel — and the purchase of the property at 137 Pond Lane would satisfy that requirement and allow the harvester to be set up at Doscher Park.

In an interview this week, Paulson confirmed that selling the parcel at 137 Pond Lane to the CPF is contingent upon the agreement to close Pond Lane to vehicle traffic.

“It’s … a condition for us, for me personally as well as the conservancy, that the whole concept of this park was to have a waterfront park,” he said in the interview, which appears in this week’s edition of The Press.

The insistence of the closure of Pond Lane is setting up a potential showdown between members of the conservancy and other supporters of the park plans, and residents who are adamant that Pond Lane should stay open to vehicle traffic.

The Southampton Village Board is expecting so much input on the topic from the public at its next monthly meeting — set for September 14 at 6 p.m. — that it is holding that meeting at the Southampton Cultural Center to allow for enough room for residents who will show up to speak. Even at the last work session — when public comment was not allowed — the presentation of the plans was given to a standing-room-only crowd at Village Hall.

Erin Meaney is one resident who is sure to be front and center at the cultural center at the meeting. Meaney is a lifelong Southampton Village resident who owns and operates the Topiaire flower shop on Jobs Lane. She is one of several residents who has signed her name to a petition asking for Pond Lane to remain open to vehicle traffic.

She outlined her concerns earlier this week.

“I don’t see why anybody would want to get rid of a village street like that, unless there was something else at play,” she said.

Meaney said she and others she has spoken with who oppose the closure of Pond Lane do not have an issue with the park plans but instead would like to see them consider the possibility of creating the gardens while leaving the road open to vehicle traffic.

“I’m totally into another park,” she said. “If you can afford to pay for the park and maintain it, I have no problem with it, nor do most people I’ve spoken to.”

Meaney said her opposition to the closure of Pond Lane has nothing to do with concerns it could negatively impact her business, but rather that it simply feels wrong to eliminate a viable road at a time when traffic congestion in the village is at an all-time high. Those who live on other residential streets in the village are forced to deal with the burden and safety issues created by all kinds of vehicles speeding and cutting through area streets and creating often unbearable traffic, particularly during the morning and evening commutes.

“What I think has everybody sort of angry and upset is this feeling that doing away with Pond Lane was buried in the master plan of all this,” she said. “It’s just a wrong thing. It must serve somebody that wants to live on a cul-de-sac.

“I think somebody is trying to push the trustees into this being a no-brainer,” she continued, adding that closing Pond Lane will have the result of forcing more drivers onto Hill Street instead, potentially exacerbating traffic woes.

Meaney added that she and others who oppose the closure of Pond Lane don’t appreciate the way they have been treated thus far by members of the conservancy and others in support of the closure. “There’s almost this attitude of, you don’t know better,” she said. “But there’s no need to get rid of a viable village street and turn it over into a bike lane. I feel like there’s something a little less rosy here under the table.”

Members of the conservancy insist that’s not the case.

Mayor Bill Manger said earlier this week he was still waiting to see and go over the full traffic study that was done by Nelson Pope Voorhis, which was presented on August 22, to have a clearer idea of what the closure of Pond Lane would mean for drivers and the traffic situation in the village. The study, which was commissioned by the conservancy and not the village, concluded that closing Pond Lane would not lead to increased traffic problems, and added that it would enhance safety for the high numbers of pedestrians that already frequent Pond Lane.

Manger said he’s aware that many residents want to have their voices heard on the topic, which is why he moved the September 14 meeting to the cultural center.

He said he understands that many residents would like to see the road remain open for cars, and also understands that one of the reasons why the conservancy would like to close the road to vehicle traffic is because doing so would be another step in the mutli-faceted effort to clean up the polluted lake. By eliminating vehicle traffic, a larger bioswale and natural vegetative buffer zone could be created in that area next to the lake, reducing runoff.

In an effort to see if some kind of compromise could be reached, Manger said he walked the road with landscape designer Tim Rumph of Araiys Design, headquartered on Nugent Street.

“I wanted to see what possibilities there were, to not have road runoff going into the lake,” Manger explained. “The road at some points is no more than 3 feet from the lake. There’s an effort to put in a bioswale and ecologically sound buffer to protect the shoreline. I realize that’s not the silver bullet that’s going to clean up the lake, but every little bit helps.”

Manger said that Rumph told him a buffer of at least 20 to 25 feet in width would be necessary to stabilize the shoreline and prevent runoff from going into the lake, which is problematic.

“The right-of-way is only about 50 feet, and so that takes up half the right of way,” Manger explained. “You still want to have enough room for emergency vehicles. So I thought, maybe you can have one lane of traffic and make it a one-way? But then there will be a fight about if it should be one-way in or out.

“I’m trying to look at all the possibilities of what we can do on that parcel,” he continued. “It’s very narrow, and there is the curve in the road, too, and to try and get it all in there safely, it’s very difficult and tight. That’s why it’s not an easy solution.”