Look Somewhere Else
As a fourth generation resident of Sag Harbor, I have been very disturbed by the planned impound yard near the delicate wetlands and habitat of the Long Pond Greenbelt. These ponds are critical to our drinking water, the integrity of the greenbelt ecosystems and the habitat of countless species.
My grandparents Anna and Daniel Mulvihill, my aunt Dolores Zebrowski and my father William Mulvihill protected and safeguarded their nearby properties for these very reasons for most of a century. It is unconscionable to pave the imperiled greenbelt site for the storage of impounded vehicles. The inevitable leaking fluids along with frequent vehicular activity and disruption that would occur would fundamentally change the site forever.
The Village of Sag Harbor has a responsibility to seriously consider all reasonable alternatives to this ill-advised and over-priced plan.
Arguments that prior pollution at any site should deem it irrevocably unsuitable for wildness are not based on evidence-based science or knowledge of ecological principles. When our very drinking water is involved, that ignorance has consequences that should trouble every single resident of Sag Harbor and Bridgehampton.
Mary Ann Mulvihill-Decker
An Effort to Preserve
To the Editor,
As reported last week, the Sag Harbor Village Mayor and Board of Trustees are proceeding with their plan to construct a paved impound yard on property in the Long Pond Greenbelt. We regret no alternative site has been chosen.
We would like to thank the countless people who wrote letters, made phone calls, signed petitions and appeared at meetings to express their concerns about the project. We are proud so many took the time to learn about the issue, learn about the wonderful Long Pond Greenbelt, and to become better acquainted with their local officials.
Dai Dayton, President
Sandra Ferguson, Vice President
Friends of the Long Pond Greenbelt
Personal Views Got in the Way
To the Editor
It was good to see the ARB chairman Anthony Brandt step down from his position, maybe now some sanity can come back to a board that has been heavily influenced by personal opinion rather than architectural facts. It was disappointing to see that his letter of resignation was heavily redacted. I’m sure much of what he had to say would be highly prejudicial to the current West Water Street development. Mr. Brandt’s obsessive views regarding his personal views of gross floor area (GFA) rules was undermining much of what this board is designed to do. Additionally he has made it difficult for expansion of homes that he deems are excessive in gross footage even when the applicant is within such parameters.
Every Sag Harbor resident believes in preservation and maintaining the integrity of the community. But, unfortunately, Mr. Brandt’s views of preservation and history have come to mean prolonged harassment so that many applicants will abandon their plans because of the board’s rigid mentality and unwillingness to accept compromise that is both good for the community and its residents.
Even if they are not “local” to Mr. Brandt’s standards.
Thomas M. Jones