Sag Harbor Planning Board to Lead Review of West Water Street Condo Project

0
685
A proposed condo development on West Water Street and Ferry Road in Sag Harbor is now in the hands of a new owner.

By Christine Sampson

The Sag Harbor Village planning board is coordinating an environmental study of the latest version of condominium plans submitted by Greystone Property Development Corp. for the waterfront parcel once known as the 1-800-LAWYERS building at 1, 3, 5 Ferry Road, now known as 2 West Water Street.

The planning board voted during its December 27 meeting to designate itself the lead agency on the study under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), a process that will scrutinize all potential impacts of the proposal on the surrounding areas before it can be approved. The study will also help the Zoning Board of Appeals, Harbor Committee, and Board of Historic Preservation and Architectural Review in their decision-making processes.

In the latest version of the project, subdivision of the 1.94-acre parcel has been proposed to create a .69-acre parcel, which would be redeveloped, with the remainder to potentially be turned into parkland by the village. A three-story, L-shaped building with an underground parking garage and 13 residential units totaling 36,564 square feet is proposed for the smaller lot, with 13 boat slips nearby. The plan has been scaled down from Greystone’s previous effort to build a gated community of single-family townhouses there.

Katie Magee, an environmental consultant with Greystone’s engineering firm, VHB Engineering, said more details would be forthcoming in January. VHB has a deadline of January 10 to complete an expanded environmental assessment form for the planning board, which will meet next on January 24 to discuss the project.

Reached by phone last Thursday, planning board chairman Gregory Ferraris said the board is evaluating Greystone’s new proposal independently of its previous one.

“This is a new application at this point. They withdrew that application and resubmitted this, which is entirely different. . . . In theory, we may think this is a positive project for the village to go through, but we still need to dot our I’s and cross our T’s on all the issues that are identified,” he said.

Comments

LEAVE A REPLY