North Hempstead Grants Extension on Glenwood Landing Waterfront Rezoning

Manhasset, November 20—At a Town Board meeting held tonight, the North Hempstead Town Board voted to extend for one year a zoning change from industrial to multi-family residential on property located on the Glenwood Landing Waterfront south of the Glenwood Landing Power Station.

The vote was six to one in favor of the extension, with Councilman Fred Pollack dissenting. Before voting against the extension, Councilman Pollack said that he thought the zoning change represented bad public policy for waterfront property.

Before voting in favor of the extension, Supervisor Jon Kaiman said that no alternative use for the property had been proposed and that the threat to public health and marine water quality from contamination at the site was substantial.

The zoning change was triggered by an application from Glen Harbor Partners to build a condominium apartment building on the site. Glen Harbor Partners would clean up the contamination as part of the project.

The Town Board originally granted the zoning change on November 14, 2006, with the stipulation that the site be cleaned up and ground broken within one year. That vote was five to two in favor of the change, with Councilmen Fred Pollack and Wayne Wink dissenting. Mr. Wink, who was elected to the county legislature last year, no longer sits on the town board.

Several alternatives suggested

Because the site is located directly on Hempstead Harbor and because the Town of North Hempstead already owns a portion of the property, the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association formally proposed that the town purchase the privately owned portion of the site under the town's Environmental Legacy Fund. The Coalition for Hempstead Harbor proposed the site for acquisition under another public funding mechanism: the Nassau County environmental bond. That application included a letter of support from the Civic Association. The site has not been included on the TNH or county acquisition lists.

At several standing-room-only hearings, many residents expressed the desire for the site to be reclaimed and managed as public open space. There was general concensus from residents that nothing should be done with the property until funds could be found for such acqusition. A few residents also suggested that the the possibility of active industrial use was preferable to the proposed multi-family residential plan.

Another suggestion was the creation of a special intermunicipal district to manage the site. Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor John Venditto said he would be willing to discuss the idea if the Town of North Hempstead took the lead since the property is within North Hempstead.

Many residents from the TNH and TOB portions of Glenwood Landing, as well as from surrounding communities, said they would be willing to pay to clean up and maintain the site as open space.

The Civic Association and others also suggested that a waterfront zone created by the Town of North Hemptead a few years ago might be a more appropriate classification for the site. Although the code specifies that the zone is for larger parcels, the Civic Association is unaware of any practical or legal reason that would preclude applying the waterfront zone to the Glenwood Landing site.

Contamination concerns

According to the NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, the contamination at the site is contained and does not represent an immediate threat to public health or to marine water quality.

Water testing data at the Glenwood Landing outfall (located between Powerhouse Park and the Power Station) suggest that the most significant threat to water quality in Hempstead Harbor is so-called nonpoint source pollution (contaminated stormwater runoff, including bacteria).

Thoroughness of EIS debated

The Town Board considered the zoning change after accepting an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) submitted by the applicant at the direction of the town. At a hearing held in connection with the EIS, the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association, Town of Oyster Bay, and Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor stated that the document was inadequate and requested that North Hempstead reject it.

The Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee, an inter-municipal organization made up of the of municipalities surrounding Hempstead Harbor, also suggested areas where the EIS could be strengthened.

Next steps

The plan that Glen Harbor Partner proposes requires several variances, including one to permit a four-story building. At a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing last year, the ZBA indicated that a variance for four stories would be unprecedented and suggested that the applicant present a different plan. Glen Harbor Partners submitted documents this past October. A December hearing is antiticpated.

The town line runs through Glenwood Landing. The vast majority of Glenwood Landing residents live on the Oyster Bay side. The North Hempstead portion of Glenwood Landing is not contiguous with any other unincorporated area in the North Hempstead.

At the Tuesday hearing, the town confirmed that the site is being used to receive materials destined for the Roslyn viaduct reconstruction. A resident requested information on the amount of money that is being paid for this use and the names of the recipients. She suggested that these funds be designated to help the town acquire the privately owned parcel and to clean up the site.

Statement concerning the extension of the change in zone made by the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association:

Since the summary of agenda item 31 contains virtually no identifying information, I arrive tonight guessing that resolution you are considering for action pertains to the rezoning of the waterfront property in Glenwood Landing on which Glen Harbor Partners proposes construction of a condominium apartment building.

Last year when the board granted the zoning change, the board wisely made the change contingent upon the site being cleaned up and ground broken within a year.

As I hope you will recall, on more than one occasion, this room was packed with people opposed to the rezone and on at least two occasions the room remained packed for many hours while people waited for the item to be called.

I must tell you that in the last year community interest in the project—and opposition to it, at least in its present form—has not waned.

Considering the interest that the people in Glenwood Landing and surrounding communities have shown in the matter, I would think that the town would recognize that the public is entitled to both better notice that action is contemplated and to be heard.

I therefore ask that you postpone voting on this resolution and that you schedule an opportunity for the community to comment on the pros and cons of an extension. On the other hand, if you voted tonight against the extension, you would make many people in Glenwood Landing and the surrounding community happy.

I also would like to thank Glen Harbor Partners for providing the civic association with the most recent plan submitted to the ZBA. I am, however, disappointed to note that the plan seems to differ little from the previous one and does not appear to have been substantively revised based on the ZBA’s comments.

I also have the impression that over the last year discussions have occurred between the town and the applicant. I am disappointed that in that time there has been virtually no outreach to the community. The civic associations would very much like to sit down together with the applicant and representatives of the town to discuss various elements of the plan and how at least some community concerns might be mitigated.

Zoning Change on Glenwood Landing Waterfront Up For Extension

On Tuesday, November 20, the North Hempstead Town Board is scheduled to vote on a resolution that would extend a zoning change from industrial to multi-family residential on waterfront property south of the Glenwood Landing Power Station.

The meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. at Town Hall. Call TNH at 869-7646 to confirm. The zoning change would permit construction of an apartment building by Glen Harbor Parters. The project includes land that once housed Harbor Fuel as well as a town-owned parcel.

The zoning change was originally granted November 14, 2006, with the stipulation that the site had to be cleaned up and ground broken within a year.

A portion of the property has recently been used for delivery of materials destined for the Roslyn viaduct project.

Please attend the board meeting to to support the following:
• the community is entitled to notice that an extension is being considered;
• the community is entitled to be heard on the matter;
• action should NOT be taken until a public hearing on the extension has been conducted.

If you cannot attend the hearing, please contact Supervisor Jon Kaiman (869-7700) and Councilpersons Robert Troiano (869-7799), Thomas Dwyer (869-7696), Angelo Ferrara (869-7716), Lee R. Seeman (869-7692), Fred Pollack (869-7698). Email addresses and FAX numbers are posted on the TNH website (www.northhempstead.com).

Glen Harbor Partners has submitted revised plans to the Zoning Board of Appeals. A December ZBA hearing on the variance application is anticipated. It will be important for as many people as possible to attend.

Town Environmental Commission to Review Developer's Proposal for East Side of Motts Cove Road

Reported in the October edition of News from the Hill, the newsletter of the Hill Terrace Civic Association:

UPDATE ON COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC, PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, MOTTS COVE ROAD

The letters you wrote in August to Patricia Baranello, Chairwoman, Town of Oyster Bay, Zoning Board of Appeals, (ZBA), (with a copy to Neil Bergin, Commissioner of Environmental Resources, Town of Oyster Bay), resulted in over 200 letters being received, with most of them being in opposition to the proposed subdivision. This, according to James McCaffrey, Executive Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals. At their August meeting, the Zoning Board of Appeals issued a “Reserved Decision” on the petition by Country Club Developers for a variance to permit flag lots at their proposed development. The ZBA referred the developers application to TEQR; TOBAY’s Environmental Quality Review Division, of it’s Department of Environmental Resources, for review. It is anticipated that this will require at least two months to complete before it is returned to the ZBA for action.

Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Comments on Flag Lot Variances for Motts Cove Rd

Thursday, July 26: The Town of Oyster Bay Zoning Board of Appeals held a variance hearing for flag lots on a 6-unit subdivison on the east side of Motts Cove Road. The property straddles Glen Head and Roslyn Harbor. Five lots would be in Glen Head; one would be in Roslyn Harbor. The application was last on the agenda and was called around midnight. The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association's remarks, made in concert with the Hill Terrace Civic Association, are below:

Good evening. My name is Patrice Benneward. I am the president of the GW/GH Civic Association. The civic association believes that this proposal requires a positive declaration under SEQRA based on the physical characteristics and location of the parcel, the density requested, the parcel’s proximity to two small state- and federal-listed wetlands across the street, and the potential impact on wildlife.

As I hope you have observed firsthand, the site is located in an area that receives a tremendous amount of runoff. Much of this runoff is destined for Hempstead Harbor, a state and federally protected water body. Numerous county, village, and town storm drains are in the vicinity. There also is a water district pumping facility. The impact of the proposal on the harbor and on this infrastructure needs to be thoroughly understood and addressed.

The parcel is sloped, densely wooded, and contains two small ponds. If the proposal is accepted as is and at the requested density, the result will destroy virtually all of these characteristics. The ponds will be gone, the site will be stripped of virtually all vegetation, and the slopes will be significantly recontoured. The implications of so great an alteration need to be thoroughly understood and addressed, particularly in light of the state’s emphasis on proper stormwater controls. The Planning Dept. has prepared a map of slopes in Glenwood Landing and lower Glen Head that documents steep slopes on the subject parcel. I am submitting a copy of that map for your review.

The town’s own recent study of land use in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head has documented two small state- and federally- listed wetlands across the street in Roslyn Harbor. I am submitting a map prepared by the Planning Dept. showing these wetlands. The wetlands are surrounded by other valuable water features and slopes in an area where three more new homes are planned. The impact of altering the subject parcel on these features and the three additional homes soon to be constructed need to be thoroughly understood and addressed.

Peregrine falcons and red tailed hawks are frequently seen in the vicinity. The potential impact of this proposal on their nesting and feeding behaviors needs to be thoroughly understood and addressed.

Finally, development of the parcel will require relocation of the golf club’s maintenance road to a position much closer to Hill Terrace than the current maintenance road. The impact and details of such a relocation need to be thoroughly understood and addressed, particularly since the new location will be much closer to many more property owners than at the present location.

For these reasons, we believe that the only responsible route to an informed decision on this application is a full SEQRA-mandated Environmental Impact Statement with public scoping. I underscore the importance of public scoping.

I would like to add that virtually all of the conditions I have mentioned pertinent to SEQRA review could and should have been known to the applicant before he purchased the property or submitted this application.

There also is a great deal of concern about some of the construction practices that have recently been employed in the neighborhood, both in general and by this applicant in particular.

A moment ago I mentioned that the site contains two ponds. Well, there were two ponds until an attempt was made to fill one of them in. At least one stop work order was issued in connection with this activity, but not before a considerable amount of damage was done. I am happy to report that the pond is gradually restoring itself and has made considerable progress toward this end. I respectfully submit that this application should NOT move forward until the applicant restores the pond to its previous condition. Such flagrant disregard for the procedures and regulations mandated by town and village codes MUST NOT be tolerated by this board or any other board in any jurisdiction.

In addition, as you know, the applicant is currently building six homes on a sloped, one-acre site nearby. Unfortunately, no attempt appears to have been made to preserve or accommodate the natural slope of that parcel; virtually every tree and bush has been removed from the site; and construction-related stormwater controls have been less than exemplary. In addition, the project is taking a long time to complete, subjecting nearby property owners to dust, mud, noise, and a view of a portable bathroom. Another temporary concern is inadequate security, of particular importance because of the proximity of Glenwood Landing school and the large number of children who live nearby. The permanent end result is entirely too many homes for the site and a detrimental change in the leafy, gardenlike atmosphere of the community.

In light of these concerns, we question the wisdom of issuing any variances, site plan approvals, or building permits to this applicant until he proves he plans to employ best management practices and unless the town is willing to follow through with vigorous monitoring and enforcement. I have contacted the Planning Dept. to ask that any warnings, concerns relating to possible code violations, or actual code violations issued to the applicant on this or any other project in the Town of Oyster Bay or the Village of Roslyn Harbor be incorporated into the record of this hearing and I ask you to be certain that this occurs.

Finally, because this parcel spans two jurisdictions, I urge you to reach out to the Village of Roslyn Harbor on this application and to communicate and coordinate with the village in every possible way in order to achieve an outcome that will be acceptable to both communities.

Thank you for your attention and careful consideration of this application.

Athletic Field Proposed for Tappen Draws Community Comment at Oyster Bay Town Board Meeting

Tuesday, June 26—Several community groups today addressed the Oyster Bay Town Board about the possibility of a new athletic field at Tappen Beach. The statement made by the civic association follows:

Good evening. My name is Patrice Benneward. I am speaking to you on behalf of the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association. I am here because, although I have no details, I have heard through the grapevine that you may be considering installing a second athletic field at Tappen Beach.

First, our organization wants to thank you for considering an additional athletic field in the Glenwood / Glen Head area, as well as for several recent improvements at Tappen Beach—including a gazebo, playgrounds, benches, landscaping, and repair of the boat launch.

All of these initiatives are very much appreciated. The civic association does have some concerns, though, about locating another athletic field at the beach. While these concerns may not be insurmountable, we do feel that they present some serious challenges.

I served on the steering committee that created the Glenwood Landing Waterfront Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan. I believe the plan noted that a study examining the recreational needs of the area would be useful. I suggest that it is important to conduct such a study now, both to get a better grip on the demand for specific types of activities and to survey the possible locations for facilities that could address these needs.

I also think that the addition of an athletic field at the beach represents a major change in use and that such a project requires considerable public input and a formal public hearing.

Our organization, for example, has concerns about the impact of an additional athletic field on view corridors, the picnic and play areas, mature trees, the sitting area north of the pool, and parking. Public input and a formal hearing would provide a forum for these concerns—as well as the concerns of others—to be taken into consideration.

We also wonder whether the new facility would be open to all residents or just to members of particular clubs or groups. It seems to us that a public discussion about the pros and cons of each approach is necessary before moving forward one way or the other.

Our organization is also a strong supporter of planning. We advocate an updated comprehensive plan for Tappen Beach as a means of avoiding piecemeal development; ensuring that we get the most bang for the buck; and guaranteeing that improvements remain viable over the long term. We suggest that the time is ripe for such a plan and urge that it be created now—and with ample public participation.

I also would like to mention that the civic association is a strong supporter of the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (HHPC). A representative of the civic association has attended almost every HHPC meeting for the last decade. To the best of my knowledge, HHPC has not been informed that this project may be in the works and, in fact, often seems to be left out of the loop on many projects that impact the harbor. In my view, it would be a real advance if, as a matter of policy, all departments were made aware that they should bring HHPC into the loop on all matters that affect the harbor.

Finally, for a very long time and as I believe you are all aware, this community has been patiently waiting for the utility properties adjacent to Tappen Beach to be brought into the public domain. When the back-up generators were installed across the street, all parties assured us, albeit informally, that the propane field would, in all likelihood, be purchased by the town and the wetland lot would be donated to the town.

Since then, the propane field has made both the county and town bond act lists, and the town has even received grants to put toward the acquisition of the property and the initial planning. Yet, as far as I know, we are not any closer to acquiring either lot today than we were five or six years ago. In fact, the pending sale of KeySpan may actually be jeopardizing the exchange. It is essential that the town acquire these properties as quickly as possible and, yet again, I urge you to pursue them very aggressively.

On a personal note, although I have been actively involved in local waterfront issues for some time now, I have not mentioned my own personal desires regarding uses at Tappen Beach—and believe me I do have them—in any forum to date. This is because I have felt it would be premature in the absence of a community platform open to all. I have taken it for granted that once the utility properties were acquired such a forum would be forthcoming. However, as the purchase of the properties seems to be taking so long and only seems to become more questionable, I think it is perhaps important to begin planning for the future of the lands that are in the public domain now in an open forum that balances the competing recreational desires of all residents.

Thank you for your attention and interest in the Glenwood Landing Waterfront.

New Athletic Field at Tappen Beach?

The Town of Oyster Bay is apparently considering installing an artificial turf athletic field at Tappen Beach. As of this writing, how installation of such a field might affect view corridors and existing amenities—such as the picnic area, playgrounds, gazebo, roller hockey ring, trees, marina, sitting area north of the pool, and parking lot—is unknown to the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association.

Whether the field would be available to all residents or just to members of certain clubs also is unknown. The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association recognizes there may be a need for more athletic fields in the area. However, we believe a study is needed to assess this potential need and the possible locations for such fields.

We believe that the installation of an athletic field at Tappen Beach is a major change in use that requires public input and a formal hearing. We also believe that a new comprehensive plan for Tappen Beach that has been fully vetted by the public is a necessary precursor to such a change. Because the possible acquisition of the utility properties affects the ability to plan, we believe that the town should aggressively pursue acquisition of the these properties despite the pending sale of KeySpan.

In all cases, the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association is committed to maintaining and maximizing view corridors and to passive uses at Tappen Beach. We also believe that amenities at Tappen Beach should be open to all residents, regardless of whether or not they belong to a particular club.

TOB ZBA Hearing on Motts Cove Rd Subdivision Rescheduled

The Town of Oyster Bay Zoning Board of Appeals hearing for a subdivision proposed for the east side of Motts Cove Road just south of the footbridge has apparently been rescheduled for Thursday, July 26.

The parcel straddles Glen Head and Roslyn Harbor. Five lots are proposed for the Glen Head portion; one is proposed for the Roslyn Harbor portion. The parcel is sloped and irregularly shaped and contains water features.

TOB recently held a hearing on code amendments that could, potentially, reduce the number of lots permitted on the parcel. Among the most relevant is an amendment concerning steep slopes and wetlands (see Study Addresses Community Character in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head, April 6; Civic Documents Architectural Styles of Glen Head & Glenwood Landing Homes, April 2.

At a recent Town Board hearing on the amendments, John Chase, the attorney for the subdivision applicant, argued that Glen Head and Glenwood Landing should be exempted from such amendments. According to Mr. Chase, his client's land is the last parcel available for development in the area, steep slope protections have nothing to do with environmental concerns and everything to do with density in relatively densely populated areas, and a reduction in the number of lots would bankrupt his client.

Mr. Chase said that these so-called facts should exempt his client—and all of Glen Head and Glenwood Landing—from the code changes being considered. The Civic Association disagrees with Mr. Chase on all points and so stated at the Town Board hearing.

Most incorporated villages surrounding Glen Head and Glenwood Landing have adopted similar measures as those being reviewed in TOB, making it imperative that Glen Head and Glenwood Landing follow suite to avoid becoming an even more appealing target for spot developers interested in the quickest and easiest buck possible.

For more information about the ZBA hearing, contact TOB (624-6232) and see Civic Spot postings Zoning Hearing Scheduled for Subdivision on Motts Cove Road in Glen Head, April 16; Adjournment Requested for Motts Cove Variance Hearing, April 24. Agenda changes are common, so be sure to check with TOB if you plan to attend the hearing. You may also write to the ZBA at 54 Audrey Avenue, Oyster Bay, NY 11771.

Memorial Day Fireworks in Hempstead Harbor

Look up and west Saturday evening, May 26, for Memorial Day Weekend Fireworks from Hempstead Harbor and Bar Beach parks. Concert begins at 6 p.m. Produced by Town of North Hempstead.

TNH ZBA Hearing Continued on Glenwood Landing Waterfront Condo Application

Wednesday, May 16—The Town of North Hempstead (TNH) Zoning Board of Appeals ZBA) has continued the hearing on the Glen Harbor Partners application for a four-story condominium apartment building on the Glenwood Landing Waterfront.

Glen Harbor Partners has applied for four variances: three are height variances, and one variance would permit a building with four stories. The variances would clear the way for site plan review of a proposed 60-unit condominium apartment building next to the Glenwood Landing Power Station.

The property was once the home of Harbor Fuel. Some of the property is owned by TNH and would be sold to Glen Harbor Partners if the variances are granted and the site plan is approved.

ZBA Chairman David Mammina told Glen Harbor Partners that the ZBA could vote on the application today or the hearing could be continued to give the applicant time to produce a plan for a lower building with no more than three stories.

Glen Harbor Partners opted for the continuance. The ZBA requested that Glen Harbor provide the civic association with any plan it submits. An attorney for Glen Harbor told Civic Association Secretary Karen Greene that a plan or a letter would be produced within three weeks.

Six residents of Glenwood Landing and Glen Head spent the entire day at North Hempstead Town Hall waiting to comment on the application. All objected to the height and footprint of the building. The hearing started at 9:30 a.m. The Glen Harbor Partners application was the sixth and last item on the agenda. It was called at about 3 p.m.

Below is the text of a letter written and circulated by the civic association. The text forms the basis of the civic association’s testimony:

May 16, 2007: Appeal #18237 - Glen Harbor Partners, LLc/Town of North Hempstead , variance 70-68.A, to permit the construction of a 60 residential condominium units, exceeding the permitted number of stories and height; W/side of Shore Road & Intervale Rd., Glenwood Landing, Sec. 20, Blk. K, Lot 9, & Sec. 20 Bk. Q, Lots 45, 46, 47, R-M District.

Mr. Mammina and members of the board:

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this morning. My name is Patrice Benneward. I am president of the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association. As you may know, Glenwood Landing perceives itself as one community, and our civic association spans both sides of the town line. I am speaking to you today on behalf of my own civic association as well as five other civic associations or neighborhood groups representing all of the neighborhoods closest to the site under review. They are Hill Terrace, Radcliff Manor, Todd Estates, Harbor View, and Glen Knolls, as well as Glenwood Landing and “lower” Glen Heand.

The civic association has been following this application since it was submitted and has participated in every hearing that has been held. At each of these hearings we have expressed serious concerns about the scale, height, and footprint of the proposed building; the project’s impact on our community, and its impact on Hempstead Harbor.

Unfortunately, we do not believe that our concerns have been adequately addressed. We think the EIS is sketchy at best and are disappointed and not a little shocked that the town board chose to accept it without the improvements requested by us and other groups, including the Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor, the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee, and the Town of Oyster Bay. We certainly appreciated the no votes of Wayne Wink and Fred Pollack.

Today I appear before you to express our objection to the height and story variances the applicant requests. During the environmental review and rezoning process, the applicant repeatedly stated that the building would not require height variances. Now we find that the building does require these variances. I respectfully submit that the hardship claimed is entirely self imposed and that, therefore, the variances requested should not be granted.

In your deliberations, please weigh heavily that the height and roofline of the proposed building, and the mechanicals that may be on the roof, are extremely important to this community, particularly the neighborhood known as Rams Hill, where all the TNH residents of Glenwood Landing reside

As I imagine you have observed, the Rams Hill neighborhood is located on a hill overlooking Hempstead Harbor. There is currently a sweeping view of the harbor from the road and from the first floors of the homes on Rams Hill. Although some industrial properties are in the foreground of this view, the harbor is still quite visible.

At previous hearings, the applicant has stated that after the proposed building is constructed, the harbor may still be visible from the second floor of these homes. The application before you states that the view of the harbor will not be altered. These two statements are contradictory. The unnerving possibility of a rooftop water tower also has been mentioned from time to time. And there has been no discussion of whether mechanicals will be situated on the roof and, if so, how they will be disguised.

It is our contention that view corridors represent an important public benefit and that the view corridor of Hempstead Harbor from Rams Hill must be preserved. We have already lost the view corridor from the Roslyn viaduct. We do not wish to repeat so tragic and lasting a public loss in our community.

During previous reviews, it also was stated that a variance for parking beneath the building would be required. However, we understand that the town recently passed an ordinance permitting under building parking. We regret, therefore, that we no longer have the opportunity to register a comment about this troubling aspect of the proposal.

However, in your deliberations, I urge you to at least consider the folly of parking so many vehicles in a new residential enclave so close to the water in so isolated a location. How and where will these vehicles be evacuated in the case of flooding? Any resident can tell you that flooding in this vicinity is hardly uncommon. How will the gasoline and motor oil from these vehicles affect water quality in Hempstead Harbor after a flood?

In addition, it seems unrealistic to locate residential property so close to several active generators.

Please be aware that sentiment in this community is overwhelmingly opposed to a project of this scale in Glenwood Landing, particularly on waterfront property that the vast majority of people believe should be preserved as open space. There was standing room only at the two rezoning hearings held for the project. We were the last item on the agenda and people waited till 11 p.m. to be called. No one spoke in favor on the project. Many people said they would consider paying to keep the town-owned land in the public domain, to bring the rest of the property into public ownership, to clean up the property, and to reclaim it as parkland. Yet the costs and logistics of doing so have not been explored.

I have seldom seen this type of unity on any issue. My sense is that you would be hard pressed to find anyone in Glenwood Landing or Glen Head who thinks this project is a good idea. Certainly, the people on Rams Hill, who are TNH residents, are virtually 100% united in their opposition to the project.

I think it also is important for you to weigh heavily that neither the TNH or the TOB portion of Glenwood Landing has apartment buildings, other than a few small-scale structures that can only be described as quaint. This apartment building will, in fact, more than double the population in the TNH portion of Glenwood Landing, which is the oldest portion of the hamlet—a significant impact if ever there was one. The height, footprint, and scale of the building is completely out of character. This community is, in fact, so small that it does not have mail delivery. We must actually go to the post office to pick up our mail. Homes are also modest in size. A single unit in the proposed building is larger than many of the single-family homes in GWL.

Note, too, that GWL is completely isolated from every other community in TNH, a fact that has permitted the hamlet to preserve a unique character. Therefore, what may be good for Port Washington or New Hyde Park is not necessarily good for Glenwood Landing. In fact, as much as we like and admire communities in other parts of the town, we would prefer not to be remade in their image. I urge you to be guided by this sentiment as you interpret and apply the town code.

The applicant has stated that the portion of the property on east side of Shore Road will be dedicated to the town. Although there are some aspects of the proposal that are appealing (such as privately funded cleanup of contaminated public and private land, and public access to a waterfront walkway), please be advised that the loss of public waterfront land in exchange for parcel that is steep, irregularly shaped, on a sharp curve, and not on the waterfront can hardly be considered a particularly good bargain for the people of Glenwood Landing or the people in the town as a whole. This also is the second time in roughly a decade that the town has divested itself of publicly owned waterfront land in Glenwood Landing. One such transaction is more than enough.

Furthermore, no details of the public walkway have been specified. What materials will be used in construction, how wide will the walkway be, how will it be maintained, what will the hours of access be, how much parking will there be for visitors? In addition, renderings show a lawn between the building hardscape and the walkway. Lawns have little wildlife value and are an unwelcome source of nutrient loading into nearby waterways.

Therefore, we believe that the area between the building hardscape and the walkway should be managed for wildlife. Furthermore, we believe that all of the outdoor property beyond the footprint of the building and its hardscape should be managed through a conservation easement held by a nonprofit organization such as the North Shore Land Alliance, which has expressed interested in such an arrangement. None of these issues has been resolved.

Finally, the issue of the sewer line remains unresolved. There are several underused parcels along Shore Road. How many times will Shore Road be opened for a sewer line given the amount of underused property there? Would a sewer line that permits hookups for certain areas in Glenwood Landing improve water quality in the harbor? The town has wisely, if somewhat belatedly joined forces with TOB and other nearby municipalities to apply for a grant to conduct a sewer feasibility study that may answer some of these questions.

Most importantly, will Glen Cove accept the sewer line? We understand that the applicant recently had a meeting with Glen Cove at which the mayor stated that the sewer has capacity. We, too, recently had a meeting with the mayor, who assured as that the city’s acceptance of the sewer line was not a done deal. The mayor told us that the applicant has said that if Glen Cove does not accept the line, Port Washington will. This sounds like strong arm tactics to us. It is also the first time that we know of that Port Washington has been mention as a possible route.

The entire EIS is based on a sewer line to Glen Cove, and we do not believe that a possible hookup to Port Washington has been investigated with any thoroughness at all.

For all of these reasons, we believe this application should be denied, or, at the very least, we believe the ZBA should delay action until the costs and logistics of keeping the town-owned portion of this property in the public domain, bringing the privately owned portion of the property into the public domain, and reclaiming and managing the entire parcel as fully remediated open space are fully explored; a sewer feasibility study is completed and the question of whether Glen Cove accepts the line is resolved; questions about the roof line and related issues are settled; and a conservation easement for all of the land surrounding the building is established.

Thank you for your consideration.

Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Comments on Lundy Environmental Impact Statement

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Assocation today filed the comments below in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lundy Property. The Oyster Bay Town Board heard the application to rezone the property on March 27.

To: Aldona Lawson, TOB TEQR Division, 150 Miller Place, Syosset, NY 11791

Fr: Patrice Benneward, President, Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association, PO Box 23, Glenwood Landing, NY 11547

Re: MARCH 27 HEARING – Z-3-04 To consider the application of DUMOND ENTERPRISES, LLC, contract vendee, and TRANSTECHNOLOGY, CORPORATION, fee owner, for a Change of Zone, from an “LI” District (Light Industry) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence) to an “RMF-16” District (Multi-Family Residence) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence), to allow the development of 15 new single-family residences and 41 new townhouse units, which would replace an existing 112,135 square foot one-story industrial building on property located at One Robert Lane, Glen Head, New York. (M.D. 2/13/07 #22).

---------------

I understand that the hearing on the above application may be closed but that comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement may be submitted through today. The civic association wishes to add the comments below to the comments made at the hearing by Karen Greene.

• Traffic: Turning right or left onto Glen Head Road from Dumond Place is difficult due to poor visibility. In addition, when traveling eastbound on Glen Head Road, making a left turn onto Dumond Place (as well as onto other side streets in the vicinity) can backup traffic to Glen Cove Avenue. The problem is frequently exacerbated by trains at the Glen Head Station. The proposed subdivision cannot help but worsen these conditions. We believe these traffic issues require more thorough study and that they must be effectively mitigated if the subdivision moves forward, particularly since the only way to enter or leave the subdivision would apparently be via Dumond Place.

• Sewer Line: We question the wisdom of approving a privately financed sewer line without examining the sewer needs of the properties in the surrounding area. We think the public interest would best be served by examining whether hooking up specific areas in the vicinity of the proposed line would improve groundwater quality or water quality in Hempstead Harbor, as well as whether such hookups would help to mitigate any flooding that may occur on some properties. If such an evaluation determines that sewering specific areas would be beneficial, we think the public interest would best be served if the engineering specifications of the sewer line were rethought and mechanisms for funding such hookups were fully explored. We are under the impression that the proposed subdivision and sewer line are in the Hempstead Harbor drainage basin and that at least a portion of the sewer line runs through the special groundwater protection area. But even if this were not the case, we believe the concerns we have outlined relative to sewering would remain valid. Note that a sewer feasibility study is underway in Glenwood Landing, prompted at least in part by a privately funded sewer line that may be constructed along the Glenwood Landing Waterfront.

• Open Space: The density of the proposed subdivision is far greater than in any other subdivision in Glen Head, perhaps with two exceptions. As the area approaches build out, open space has become increasingly important to the public good. We think the community interest requires that the site plan include a generous amount of public open space, as well as private open space that is visible to the public. We urge that at least one single family building and one multi-family building be dropped from the plan with no corresponding increase in lot coverage. We urge open space to be maximized in areas visible to the public, such as front- and side-yard setbacks, particularly at corners. We urge the inclusion in the site plan of public green spaces and the use of creative and innovative architectural, design, and planning techniques that promote a walkable neighborhood ambiance and that minimize the bulk of buildings and the features (such as garage doors) that frequently detract from the perception of open space.

Finally, we thank the Town of Oyster Bay for requiring an environmental review and appreciate the opportunity to comment.

Variance Hearing for Motts Cove Road Subdivision Rescheduled

The Town of Oyster Bay Zoning Board of Appeals hearing on an application for variances to permit a six-unit subdivision on the east side of Motts Cove Road in Glen Head on the Oyster Bay - Roslyn Harbor line (see previous postings) has been rescheduled for Thursday, June 7.

Adjournment Requested for Motts Cove Variance Hearing

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association and Todd Estate Civic Association have requested an adjournment for the Town of Oyster Bay Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing on a six-lot subdivision proposed for the east side of Motts Cove Road on property sold to a developer by Engineers Country Club.

Five of the requested lots are in Glen Head; one lot is in Roslyn Harbor. The hearing is currently scheduled for Thursday evening, April 26. A neighboring property owner also has requested an adjournment.

The parcel appears to be characterized by a number of features that complicate the application: It spans two jurisdictions permitting two different lot sizes, it is irregularly shaped, it is steeply and irregularly sloped, and it contains two ponds. The civic associations and nearby property owners would like the opportunity to learn more about these matters before the hearing.

We also understand that the two ponds on the property were recently disturbed by activity for which no permits had been issued and that at least one stop work order was issued. Furthermore, many people who frequently travel on Motts Cove Road have commented that the amount of silt escaping from the property has increased dramatically in recent months. This would appear to be inconsistent with the state’s current emphasis on increased stormwater controls. We would like the opportunity to investigate these matters as well.

In addition, the access road shown on the application appears to be uncomfortably close to the neighboring property, which contains a mature garden with many specimen trees, as well as one of the oldest and most beautifully restored homes in Roslyn Harbor. In addition, the use of the right of way would change dramatically, from a little used service drive to an active, full-fledge road. We would like the opportunity to evaluate the impact of these changes on the adjacent property.

Finally, we were puzzled when we learned that the application was originally filed with the county planning commission. We would like the opportunity to contact the county to determine whether the application was accepted; what direction, if any, was given to the applicant; and whether, in the county’s view, a positive declaration and full environmental review with public scoping may be appropriate and what jurisdiction might become the lead agency.

Variance Hearing Set for Glenwood Landing Waterfront Condo Application

The Town of North Hempstead Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) application by Glen Harbor Partners for variances to permit a condominium apartment building on the Glenwood Landing Waterfront is on the ZBA agenda for Wednesday, May 16, at 9:30 a.m.

According to the ZBA application, three height-related variances are needed to build the project as proposed: a one-story variance to permit a four-story structure; a two-foot, four-inch height variance for all of the structure except the elevator builkhead; and a six-foot, one-inch variance for the elevator builkhead on the street side of the building.

Last fall, when the town board heard the application to rezone the property from industrial use to multi-family residential use, the board noted that a variance would be need to permit ground-level parking under the building. Subsequently, the town passed a regulation permitting underground parking. Thus, a variance for parking beneath the building is no longer necessary.

At that time, the height of the building appeared to be within the height permited by town code; the need for a variance to permit four stories was identified. For more information, contact TNH Planning / ZBA at 869-7755.

Developer Requests May 16 Zoning Variance Hearing for Glenwood Landing Waterfront Apartments

Glen Harbor Partners has requested a hearing date of Wednesday, May 16, for its application to the Town of North Hempstead Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for variances in connection with the apartment building proposed for the Glenwood Landing Waterfront south of the Glenwood Landing Power Station.

According to the ZBA application, three height-related variances are needed to build the project as proposed: a one-story variance to permit a four-story structure; a two-foot, four-inch height variance for all of the structure except the elevator builkhead; and a six-foot, one-inch variance for the elevator builkhead on the street side of the building.

Last fall, when the town board heard the application to rezone the property from industrial use to multi-family residential use, the board noted that a variance would be need to permit ground-level parking under the building. Subsequently, the town passed a regulation permitting underground parking. Thus, a variance for parking beneath the building is no longer necessary.

At that time, the height of the building appeared to be within the height permited by town code; the need for a variance to permit four stories was identified.

Zoning Hearing Scheduled for Subdivision on Motts Cove Road in Glen Head

Engineers Country Club has sold property along the east side of Motts Cove Road in Roslyn Harbor and Glen Head to a developer who plans a residential subdivision. The Glen Head portion of the property is in the Town of Oyster Bay (TOB). The following hearings are on the TOB Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) calendar for Thursday, April 26, at 7 p.m.

The notices describe all the lots as flags and state that each one has either too little frontage or too little rear yard setback, which would seem to indicated that at least two variances are being requested for each lot. There also is a pond on the parcel, and one wonders what provisions have been made for its protection. For more information, contact the TOB ZBA at 624-6232


• HEARING NO. 19: APPEAL NO. 07-211, GLEN HEAD COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC: Variance to erect a one-family dwelling, on a sub-divided flag lot, having less rear yard setback than required by Ordinance. (Parcel 1) E/s/o Motts Cove Rd., 409.84 ft. S/o Washington Ave., Glen Head, NY SEC. 20 BLK. F LOT p/o 1076 ZONE R1-7

• HEARING NO. 20: APPEAL NO. 07-212, GLEN HEAD COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC: Variance to erect a one-family dwelling, on a sub-divided flag lot, having reduced frontage. (Parcel 2) N/s/o Private Right-of-Way, 47 ft. E/o Motts Cove Rd., Glen Head, NY SEC. 20 BLK. F LOT p/o 1076A ZONE R1-7

• HEARING NO. 21: APPEAL NO. 07-213, GLEN HEAD COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC: Variance to erect a one-family dwelling, on a sub-divided flag lot, having reduced frontage. (Parcel 3) N/s/o Private Right-of-Way, 86.38 ft. E/o Motts Cove Rd., Glen Head, NY SEC. 20 BLK. F LOT 1076B ZONE R1-7

• HEARING NO. 22: APPEAL NO. 07-214, GLEN HEAD COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC: Variance to erect a one-family dwelling, on a sub-divided flag lot, having reduced frontage. (Parcel 4) N/s/o Private Right-of-Way, 165.42 ft. E/o Motts Cove Rd., Glen Head, NY SEC. 20 BLK. F LOT 36C ZONE R1-7

• HEARING NO. 23: APPEAL NO. 07-215, GLEN HEAD COUNTRY CLUB DEVELOPERS, LLC: Variance to erect a one-family dwelling, on a sub-divided flag lot, having reduced frontage. (Parcel 5) N/s/o Private Right-of-Way, 241.44 ft. E/o Motts Cove Rd., Glen Head, NY SEC. 20 BLK. F LOT 36C ZONE R1-7

Community Meeting on Scudders Pond Restoration

If you live in Glenwood Landing, watch your mailbox for an invitation to attend a community meeting about the state of Scudders Pond and the major restoration projects that are about to begin there. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 25, at Sea Cliff Village Hall at 7:30 p.m.

The invitation has been extended by the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (HHPC), the Village of Sea Cliff, and the NYS Dept. of State / Division of Coastal Resources. HHPC will be mailing an invitation to all Glenwood Landing residents. Glen Head and Roslyn Harbor residents, indeed all interested parties, are also welcome.

Nearly a million dollars have been obtained to begin major improvements to the pond and its sub-watershed. The public meeting will review the problems uncovered and the various recommendations to restore the health of this important drainage area.

Press release issued by HHPC

The Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (“HHPC”) announced today the completion of a two-year study on Sea Cliff’s Scudder’s Pond and the scheduling of a public meeting to discuss the results and the recommended improvements. The public meeting will take place on Wednesday, April 25th at 7:30 p.m. at Sea Cliff Village Hall (corner of Sea Cliff and Summit Avenues) in Sea Cliff.

As a result of the study and through a unique inter-municipal effort, nearly a million dollars’ worth of recommended improvements will be implemented and more are anticipated. These improvements are funded largely through grants.

Though small, Sea Cliff’s historic Scudder’s Pond has a big impact on water quality and wildlife in nearby Hempstead Harbor. However age has taken its toll. Fortunately, as a result of a two-year study recently completed by the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (“HHPC”), the pond is about to see some major improvements.

According to Sea Cliff Mayor Eileen Krieb, “This small pond is invaluable to our village. It not only protects our harbor from stormwater runoff but has been loved by locals for over 100 years for ice skating and wildlife watching. The pond has given us a lot over the years. It deserves some loving attention”.

Since it was last dredged in 1980, the two-acre pond's natural filtering ability has been significantly impaired as it has filled with silt and sediment. A small weir separating it from another pond upstream has deteriorated, allowing more sediment to reach the pond and fill it in. Invasive plants have taken over large areas in and around the pond. This vegetation not only obscures the public’s view, but chokes out native plants and deprives certain animals of their habitats.

To address these issues, HHPC hired two firms, EEA of Stony Brook and Cameron Engineering & Associates of Woodbury to review conditions in the pond and its subwatershed (the area that drains into the pond) and to prepare recommendations for improvements and cost estimates for implementing these improvements. This study, funded in part by an Environmental Protection Fund grant from the New York State Department of State, is now complete and several of its recommendations have been funded.

The public meeting will explain the results of the study and the anticipated improvements.

“We not only want to restore the pond but also implement measures to help prevent it from filling in again” said William Clemency, Chair of the HHPC which represents the nine municipalities that surround Hempstead Harbor. He explained that one of the recommendations is the installation of a state-of-the-art storm drain system called a “swirl separator” to remove sediment before it can reach the pond. This will be one of the first of the recommendations that will be carried out.
The Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (“HHPC”) announced today the completion of a two-year study on Sea Cliff’s Scudder’s Pond and the scheduling of a public meeting to discuss the results and the recommended improvements. The public meeting will take place on Wednesday, April 25th at 7:30 p.m. at Sea Cliff Village Hall (corner of Sea Cliff and Summit Avenues) in Sea Cliff.

As a result of the study and through a unique inter-municipal effort, nearly a million dollars’ worth of recommended improvements will be implemented and more are anticipated. These improvements are funded largely through grants.

Though small, Sea Cliff’s historic Scudder’s Pond has a big impact on water quality and wildlife in nearby Hempstead Harbor. However age has taken its toll. Fortunately, as a result of a two-year study recently completed by the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee (“HHPC”), the pond is about to see some major improvements.

According to HHPC Director Eric Swenson, “New York State and Nassau County have recognized the importance of these efforts by earmarking $ 821,000 from two New York State Environmental Protection Fund grants and from the first Nassau County Environmental Bond Act”. In addition, the Village of Sea Cliff has committed itself to providing $145,000 in matching funds. Additional funding has been nominated for the county’s second Environmental Bond Act.

These funds will be used for a number of improvements including the removal of sediment and invasive plants from the pond; the installation of a swirl separator; reinforcing channel banks leading from the swirl separator to the pond; creating natural treatment wetlands; replacing a deteriorated weir and planting native vegetation in place of the invasive plants.

Patrice Benneward, President of the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association stated that “this is an excellent example of many levels of government working with citizens to benefit the community”.

The Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee is an inter-municipal committee, formed in 1995 to work cooperatively on improving the water quality of Hempstead Harbor. It is comprised of the County of Nassau, the Towns of Oyster Bay and North Hempstead, the City of Glen Cove, and the Villages of Sea Cliff, Roslyn Harbor, Roslyn, Flower Hill and Sands Point. Since its inception, the HHPC has obtained 22 grants totaling more than $1.3 million for the betterment of the harbor and its watershed.

Glen Harbor Partners Files Application for Glenwood Landing Building Permits

Glen Harbor Partners has filed an application for building permits in connection with a 60-unit condominium apartment building proposed for the west side of Shore Road in the Town of North Hempstead (TNH) portion of Glenwood Landing just south of the Glenwood Landing Power Station.

The application was filed with the TNH Building Department on March 28. In many cases, Building Department review can take several months. In this case, the review appears to have been completed in two days. Following standard procedure, the Building Department denied the application because the project requires one or more variances.

The property includes two lots owned by TNH that will be sold to the developer. The entire parcel was rezoned from industrial use to multi-family residential use last fall after several hearings that drew large numbers of residents, most of whom objected to an apartment complex on the waterfront.

Based on plans presented at that time, the project requires two variances: one for ground-level parking beneath the building and one for the number of floors in the building. The proposed height of the building shown during the rezoning processes complied with the requirments specified in the zoning code for multi-family residential use.

The next step will likley be a hearing before the TNH Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), possibly in mid-May. The TNH ZBA usually meets during the day.

According to TNH and to the applicant, the project is contingent upon a sewer line to Glen Cove. Last fall, after a meeting with the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association and No GWL Condos, Glen Cove Mayor Ralph Suozzi notified TNH that a sewer line would not be considered until Glen Cove had completed various studies of its own, a process that could take some time. Mayor Suozzi said that when those studies were completed, if sewer lines were accepted, areas with demonstrated need based on comprhensive study would be given preference.

No such study has been completed in Glenwood Landing. However, last fall, the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee, an inter-municipal organization made of of the nine municipalities surrounding Hempstead Harobr, applied for a grant to fund a sewer feasibility study for Glenwood Landing with the support of the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association. Whether Mayor Suozzi's position on the sewer line has changed is unknown.

At the rezoning hearing, the applicant also said that the project would include a waterfront walkway with public access at the northern and southern entrances.

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association maintains that vacant waterfront property is too valuable a recreational resource to be developed for any use other than open space—particularly in this case since the parcel includes two publically-owned lots that TNH plans to sell to the developer. In fact, several years ago, the civic association filed an application under the first TNH bond act requesting that the town purchase the privately owned portion of the parcel, combine it with the town-owned land, and manage the area as open space. The suggestion did not make the town's approved list of purchases.

In fact, over the last decade, TNH has systematically divested itself of publically owned land in Glenwood Landing. The three houses on the west side of Shore Road just north of the Swan Club are built on land that the TNH chose to sell. That sale, which caught the community off guard at the time, prompted many people to pay more attention to activities in that area and is, in fact, one of several alarming trends that prompted formation of the civic association.

Many residents of the TNH and Town of Oyster Bay portions of Glenwood Landing, Glen Head, Sea Cliff, and Roslyn Harbor have said they are willing to pay to clean up the site and to create and maintain a park. However, for unknown reasons, TNH has not been willing to explore this option or the mechanisms by which it might be achieved.

Should the project proceed, the civic association is committed to achieving the maximum amount of open space possible, particularly on the west side of Shore Road (the project also includes a small, virtually unbuildable parcel on the east side of Shore Road). The civic association applauds the inclusion of a waterfront esplanade with northern and southern access points. However, we are concerned about the quality of the materials that would be used to construct the esplanade, the hours of access, and short-term and long-term maintenance. Furthermore, we believe it is essential that all the land between the walkway and the building be managed for wildlife. Finally, we feel strongly that the only way to guarantee that these practices continue indefinitely is for them to be clearly specified in a conservation easement held by a nonprofit conservation organization. The North Shore Land Alliance, a Long Island group formed for this purpose, has manifested a strong interest in doing so.

With regard to the sewer line, we are concerned about the number of times that Shore Road may be opened to build sewer lines given the availablity of other vacant lots in the area, particularly the Shore Realty property just south of the proposed Glen Harbor project. We also think it imprudent to build a privately funded sewer line to service one development with no possibility of servicing other properties, especially if hooking up other properties would significantly improve water quality in Hempstead Harbor.

Glenwood Landing and Glen Head Turnout Low in Special Election for Nassau County Legislator

According to the Nassau County Board of Elections, overall turnout in the special election for Nassau County Legislator in District 11 was 7%.

Nassau County Board of Elections statistics show that turnout in Glenwood Landing, which is all in District 11, and the District 11 portion of Glen Head was even lower.

Of 3,197 registered voters in Glenwood Landing and the District 11 portion of Glen Head, 40 people voted—a turnout of 1.25%, compared to 9.86% in Port Washington, 4.56% in Roslyn, and 1.43% in Roslyn Harbor.

Study Addresses Community Character in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head

Acknowledging the unique architectural, environmental, and topographical reseources in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing, the Town of Oyster Bay (TOB) is conducting a zoning and planning study to map various land use and topographical features in the residential neighborhoods of Glen Head and Glenwood Landing west of the railroad tracks.

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association, Todd Estates Civic Association, and other neighborhood groups are participating in the study and reaching out to interested neighbors (see postings of April 2 and March 12). The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association has taken some 150 photos of neighborhood features, including homes, wet spots, and slopes, to document the characteristics of the study area.

“The residential neighborhoods of both Glen Head and Glenwood Landing have unique architectural, environmental, and topographical resources that have attracted people to the area for years,” TOB Supervisor John Vendiotto is quoted as saying in an April 5 article about the study published in the Glen Cove Record Pilot. “Unfortunately, residents in these neighborhoods have seen an alarming trend toward knockdowns, McMansions and boxlike structures that are built to maximize every square foot of buildable property."

According to the Glen Cove Record Pilot item, the study will map the area and the data will be evaluated by the town's planner, who will then prepare planning and zoning recommendations to review with residents.

Civic Documents Architectural Styles of Glen Head & Glenwood Landing Homes

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association has assembled and submitted to the Town of Oyster Bay (TOB) a portfolio of some 150 photographs showing the architectural variety of the homes in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing.

At the request of the United Civic Associations of Glen Head and Glenwood Landing, a group made up of the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association, the Todd Estates Civic Association, Hill Terrace Civic Association, and representatives from the Plymouth Drive, Harbor View, and Radcliff Manor neighborhoods, TOB is conducting a zoning and planning study focusing on the residential districts in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing west of the railroad tracks (see March 12 posting, Land Use Research Underway in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head).

TOB has hired Frederick P. Clark, a planning firm that frequently works for the town, to conduct the study and asked the civic association to assemble the Glenwood / Glen Head photographic portfolio as a means of limiting cost.

The study ties in with land use measures that TOB recently adopted in Oyster Bay hamlet, many of which will soon be rolled out town wide if approved after appropriate public hearings. The main purpose of the measures is to curb three recent construction trends: knockdowns, so-called “MacMansions,” and boxlike structures built to minimum setback lines.

Some of the measures also are aimed at reducing runoff from construction sites and at protecting steep slopes. New York State has mandated that local municipalities adopt so-called “minimum stormwater control measures” by 2008.

Thus far, Frederick P. Clark has created three draft maps of the study area: an aerial view, steep slopes and wet areas, and lot size. The firm is currently working on a fourth map that will illustrate lot frontages.

The measures the town is considering are accepted by planning professionals as tools for helping to maintain the character, history, and architectural resources of residential neighborhoods. They include a tool new to TOB called the maximum permitted gross floor area requirement (FAR) and a reduction in an existing tool regulating the maximum inclined plane permitted for rooflines (known as height / setback ratios).

Both of these tools have been adopted in many nearby communities. The hope is that, taken together, they will encourage additions, renovations, and new construction to be more consistent with the scale of existing homes and inspire architects and builders to produce more creative, sensitive designs.

Structures built where these tools exist often tend to be less imposing and to exhibit more architectural details than those built in areas where such tools do not exist. The research being conducted by Frederick P. Clark may reveal details peculiar to certain Glenwood Landing and Glen Head neighborhoods that will help zoning, planning, and building code officials more effectively implement FAR, height/setback ratios, and other planning tools.

Lundy Hearing Closed, Comments Still Accepted on Environmental Impact Statement

The Town of Oyster Bay (TOB) hearing on the application to rezone the old Lundy site on the south side of Glen Head Road just west of the railroad tracks near Dumond Place in Glen Head has been closed. The applicant seeks a change in zone from industrial use to residential use.

Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) filed in connection with the property will be accepted until April 27. A copy of the DEIS should be available at the Gold Coast Library.

The TOB hearing held earlier this week lasted until after midnight, with a wide range of opinions expressed. The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association stressed the importance of setting aside open space in any site plan filed in connection with the site and emphasized the need to address traffic congestion and visibility at the corner of Dumond Place and Glen Head Road should the zoning change be granted and the project proposed for the site be constructed.

The Todd Estates Civic Association has taken the lead on the application, as Todd Estates borders the north side of the property. After much discussion and outreach, the Todd Estates Civic Association has expressed the view that residential development with the lowest density achievable is preferable to maintaining the current zoning and facing the possibility of a new industrial development.

The applicant proposes 15 single-family homes in an R1-7 District and 41 new townhouse units in a Multi-Family Residential District. Waste would be transported to the sewage treatment plant in Glen Cove via a private sewer line.

Wink Wins District 11 Seat in Nassau County Legislature

Wayne Wink (D) now represents all of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor, parts of Glen Head and Sea Cliff, and several other communities to the south and west in Nassau County Legislative District 11.

Mr. Wink defeated Republican challenger Louis Chisari in the special election held Tuesday, March 27. The seat was previously held by Craig Johnson (D), who was recently elected to the NYS Senate.

With the election, the Democrats hold 10 seats in the Nassau County Legislature and the Republicans hold nine seats.

Wink and Chisari Respond to Questions from Glenwood / Glen Head Civic

On Tuesday, the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association submitted questions to Wayne Wink (D, I, WF) and Louis Chisari (R, C), the two candidates seeking to represent Nassau County Legislative District 11 in the special election secheduled for Tuesday, March 27.

Mr. Chisari and Mr. Wink have submitted their responses, which are posted below exactly as they were received. As has been noted in many previous postings, all of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor and part of Glen Head and Sea Cliff make up the northeasternmost portion of Nassau County Legislative District 11.

Be sure to vote. This election determines which party takes the majority in the Nassau County Legislature. Make your opinion known. Local elections turn on a dime. Your vote, whatever it is, counts—and it is no secret that turnout is often appallingly low.

Our right to vote has been won by people who have died, been injured, or been maimed over generations to protect this democracy. Vote! It is the patriotic thing to do! Besides, did you know that if you don't vote, your license to complain expires—and you have to zip it up and wait until November to renew?

1) What is the most important single contribution you hope to make as a county legislator?

Chisari: First, to stop any and all property tax increases and second improve county services that the current County Executive and Legislature has cut while expanding their staffs.

Wink: It is no secret that our tax burden is too high; one way to alleviate that is to eliminate duplication of services between our towns and villages and the County, and to better coordinate other services. As a county legislator, I'll be working on a number of these consolidation projects, such as the transfer of certain county parks and roads from the county to the Town of North Hempstead.Transfers such as these allow the Town to maintain better these local parks and roads, while allowing the County to reallocate existing resources to sites in need of attention.

I also have a track record of working across party lines, as a consensus-builder. In a narrowly divided Legislature, my ability to work with other members of both political parties is going to be important to the taxpayers, citizens, and residents of the 11th LD and the rest of Nassau County.

2) What differences and similarities do you perceive among the communities in District 11, and how might these factors impact your service to those communities?

Chisari: The biggest similarity is the issue of property taxes, the County through the Legislature and the County Executive are oppressively taxing all communities in District 11 to the point that the people can no longer afford. Furthermore, each community is different with their own special needs, which as a County Legislator it would be my obligation to list and address each of those special needs.

Wink: While there are communities of significant affluence in the 11th District, the district also includes people of much lesser means. In the end, we all deserve the same things: clean air, clean water, a better and brighter future for our children, security for our own retirement. The reduction of waste and duplication across different levels of government is not only less expensive for everyone (lower taxes) and less confusing, it benefits all of our communities and encourages growth of the local economy.

3) What is your view of the county's role on the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee and the Manhasset Bay Protection Committee, and how would you advance the water quality improvement efforts of these inter-municipal organizations?

Chisari: I would led and effort by the County to secure more Federal and State grants to help further fund the projects.

Wink: This kind of coordination is exactly what I have been talking about throughout my campaign, and part of the reason I chose to kick off my campaign at Bar Beach. The towns have historically taken the lead in this regard, but there is a larger role for the county to play here. There was a time when the county tested the water quality of Hempstead Harbor and other bodies of water throughout the county on a regular basis. I would work to ensure the county could provide that kind of assistance and support to further the vital goals of the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee.

4) How can the decay of the historic structures and gardens under county jurisdiction be reversed, and what would you do to encourage historic preservation in general?

Chisari: This is one area I feel very strongly about. I believe that preserving the County's historic sites is extremely important. First, the County must secure Federal and State grants that are available for this effort and second, stop the County Executive from cutting the staffs of these sites so he can hire political operatives for his personal staff as he has done in the pass with the full blessing of the Democratically control Legislature.

Wink: Long Island's heritage are a resource for the people of all New York. Their preservation and maintenance are important not only for our local sense of history, but to encourage tourism and indeed attract new residents to Nassau County. It is important that the county commit to the maintenance and improvement of these historic structures, whether through the county's capital plan or by applying for state and federal grants. I have developed close relationships with many of our elected leaders in Albany and Washington, and will work with them wherever possible to secure the resources we need to reverse these deplorable trends.

5) What is your policy on open space, and how would you protect open space in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head?

Chisari: I believe at this juncture in the County's development we must preserve the little open space that is left. The County must either fund an open space acquiring program or secure federal and state grants to fund such a project.

Wink: It would be shortsighted to develop every single inch of space, whether for new homes, new businesses, or even traditional parks. When it comes to our environment, we too often forget that each generation is here not as owners, but as stewards for the generations to come. That is why, wherever appropriate, we seek to redevelop existing sites, rather than squander the limited open space we have in the area. The Town of North Hempstead and Nassau County both have environmental bonds act monies in place to purchase either open space or the development rights of open space throughout the county. I would look to these monies to preserve pristine open space wherever possible in the Glenwood Landing/Glen Head area.

6) What role can the county play in reducing traffic congestion and sprawl, both countywide and in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing in particular?

Chisari: No answer provided.

Wink: To our west, New York City has the most extensive public transportation system in the world. In Nassau, we must work harder to reduce our reliance on the automobile and improve public transit. Development of new office parks and new housing might, for example, include investment in that infrastructure. I would seek to encourage the development of mass transportation and traffic reducing initiatives by the use of Industrial Development Agency bonds for new, and where possible, existing businesses throughout the county. We must find ways to encourage more people to use the bus, and the train, rather than driving.

7) What would you do to ensure that payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) and/or taxes on utility properties in Glenwood Landing are paid and not reduced?

Chisari: This is more an issue for the State Legislature than for the County Legislature as for the payments. The PILOTs are agreements that the utility has with either, the state or county and/or the local municipality. As for the amounts they are contractual and if they are reduced it is agreed upon by the parties involved. As a County Legislator I would make sure that the any amount owed under a PILOT will not be reduced and I would insure the utility pays the amount it originally agreed upon.

Wink: I would work to ensure that existing PILOT agreements be enforced and honored by all the parties to the agreements.

8) What is the county's most significant public safety and disaster vulnerability, and how would you address it?

Chisari: No answer provided.

Wink: The most likely disaster scenario in Nassau County would likely be hurricanes or Nor'easters, which have the potential to flood low-lying areas and cause devastating erosion to our shorelines. The county, as well as all levels of government, must prepare for the unavoidable consequences of weather-related by establishing a support infrastructure for the provision of life-saving and emergency shelter facilities known as Points of Distribution (PODs). The quicker PODs can spring into action to ensure that residents are treated, clothed and sheltered in emergency situations, the more likely it is that lives can be saved and our homes protected.

9) What measures would you introduce to make county government more efficient and more accessible to the public?

Chisari: First, I believe that County government is very accessible to the public, but I feel that a Public Advocates Office charged with helping the citizens of the county navigate the municipal system is needed. Second, to make County government more efficient one party rule must end. In the last six years county government has cut the staffs of the Buildings Dept., Parks Dept. and Highway Dept., but the staffs of the County Executive and County Legislature has grown. I agree with the Governor waste must be sought out and stopped.

Wink: Throughout this campaign, and my whole career, I have been working towards consolidating services. There are many public services that are better managed locally, and things that are best handled by the county or even the state. Whatever those services are, it is important that we have transparency. People need to know WHAT government is doing, HOW it is doing it, and WHOM to contact when they need something. It's the only way the system works for ALL of its citizens. The maze of overlapping government entities often serves to conceal and frustrate the public, calling into question the very foundation of government accountability.

10) Are you willing to work in a bi-partisan manner, and what will you do to encourage bi-partisan cooperation among your colleagues?

Chisari: Yes, absolutely, but the thing I will never work bi-partisan on is any issue that would result in any type tax or county fee increase. I feel there will always be a better solution then raising taxes of county charged fees.

Wink: I have not only been willing to work in a bi-partisan manner, but I have always worked to encourage such cooperation. In the end, we all want the same things; our philosophical and partisan differences are about the best way to achieve those goals. I have never been one who wants the "issue" to linger as a weapon for some future campaign. I want to be known for real results that help the people of District 11 and all Nassau County live better lives.

Chisari, Wink in News 12 Long Island Debate

According to Cablevision's News 12 Long Island assignment desk, a debate between Louis Chisari (R, C) and Wayne Wink (D, I, WF) will air on News 12 Long Island tonight at 11:30 p.m.; Saturday at 8:30 a.m., 11:30 a.m., 1:30 p.m., and 4:30 p.m.; and Sunday at 6 a.m., 10 p.m., 1:30 p.m., and 3:30 p.m. The debate may turn up at other times, as well.

Mr. Wink and Mr. Chisari are competing for a seat in District 11 in the Nassau County Legislature. The balance of power in the county is at stake, as the party composition of the legislature is tied at nine Republican seats and nine Democratic seats.

As has been posted many times on the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Spot in recent days, all of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor and part of Sea Cliff and Glen Head are in District 11.

The election is scheduled for Tuesday, March 27, from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. Vote at your usual polling place, and look for a mailing from the Nassau County Board of Elections notifying you of the election if you are in District 11. For more information, consult previous postings below, including questions the civic association submitted to the candidates and the answers the candidates provided.

Hearing to Rezone Lundy Property in Glen Head Set for March 27

The following hearing is the first item on the Town of Oyster Bay Agenda for the Town Board Meeting on Tuesday, March 27, at 7 p.m.

"HEARING – Z-3-04 To consider the application of DUMOND ENTERPRISES, LLC, contract vendee, and TRANSTECHNOLOGY, CORPORATION, fee owner, for a Change of Zone, from an “LI” District (Light Industry) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence) to an “RMF-16” District (Multi-Family Residence) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence), to allow the development of 15 new single-family residences and 41 new townhouse units, which would replace an existing 112,135 square foot one-story industrial building on property located at One Robert Lane, Glen Head, New York. (M.D. 2/13/07 #22)."

This property is located in central Glen Head on the south side of Glen Head Road (see the following 2006 postings: August 28, Unavailability of Sewer Line May Affect Developments Proposed for Glen Head & the Glenwood Landing Waterfront; March 24, Lundy Site: Closer to Cleaner Soil).

The south side of the property borders Todd Estates. The east side of the property borders the railroad tracks. To reach the property from Glen Head Road turn south onto Dumond Place one block west of the railroad tracks.

The Todd Estates Civic Association has taken the lead on following the application.

Wink, Chisari Debate Issues Affecting Nassau County, Glen Head, Glenwood Landing

Candidates for the District 11 seat in the Nassau County Legislature appeared last night at Meet the Candidates Night sponsored by the Port Washington-Manhasset League of Women Voters at the Port Washington Library. District 11 includes all of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor and parts of Glen Head and Sea Cliff (see previous postings for more information).

The candidates, Louis Chisari (R,C) and Wayne Wink (D, I, WF), agreed that District 11 voters have a historic opportunity to affect the direction the county takes at this juncture because, with the departure of District 11 Legislator Craig Johnson (D) to the NYS Senate, the legislature is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.

The March 27 election will determine which party takes the majority.

Mr. Chisari, who was a prosecutor in the Nassau County District Attorney 's Office, said that under no circumstances would he ever raise taxes or fees for services. He pointed to increased property taxes and increased golf fees as unacceptable. He said he would attempt to hold the line on costs by seeking savings in the executive office and the legislature. He said that these two branches of county government probably have too many people on staff. He said he would not seek savings in the budgets of the departments that deliver services.

Mr. Wink said that sharing and consolidating services can help hold the line on taxes. He said that the Town of North Hempstead, where he currently serves as a councilman, has entered into inter-municipal agreements that make the town sign shop available to incorporated villages. He said that Hempstead Harbor Park, a county facility adjacent to Bar Beach, a town facility, will soon be transferred to town jurisdiction.

Mr. Wink said these arrangements will save money because the town sign shop can provide services at a lower cost than the open market and because the beaches will now be maintained by one staff instead of two. He said the county will redeploy Hempstead Harbor Park staff to other county facilities where they are needed.

Mr. Chisari said he is an independent thinker and that Mr. Wink would vote in lockstep with the “tax and spend” policies of the Democrats.

Mr. Wink said he maintains an independent voice and pointed to his vote to deny the Glen Harbor application in Glenwood Landing for a change in zone from industrial use to multi-residential use as an example. “I was one of two votes against,” Mr. Wink said. “Five of my colleagues, including the one Republican on the town board, voted in favor.”

Mr. Wink said that the Republicans in the county legislature virtually always vote as a block and rarely, if ever, break rank. He said that the Republicans do not encourage debate. He said the Democrats might be appear to be “messy,” but at least they permit discussion.

Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Asks—The Candidates Respond

On Tuesday, the Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association submitted questions to Wayne Wink (D, I, WF) and Louis Chisari (R, C), the two candidates seeking to represent Nassau County Legislative District 11 in the special election secheduled for Tuesday, March 27.

Mr. Chisari has submitted his responses; they are posted below exactly as they were received. Mr. Wink has notified us that his answers will be submitted shortly. For more information about the special election, consult previous postings; there are several.

As has been noted in many previous postings, all of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor and part of Glen Head and Sea Cliff make up the northeasternmost portion of Nassau County Legislative District 11.

Be sure to vote. This election determines which party takes the majority in the Nassau County Legislature. Make your opinion known. Local elections turn on a dime. Your vote, whatever it is, counts—and it is no secret that turnout is often appallingly low.

Our right to vote has been won by people who have died, been injured, or been maimed over generations to protect this democracy. Vote! It is the patriotic thing to do! Besides, did you know that if you don't vote, your license to complain expires—and you have to zip it up and wait until November to renew?

The questions for the Nassau County Legislative District 11 candidates and Mr. Chisari's answers follow exaclty as there were received. Mr. Wink's answers will be posted exactly as they are received as soon as they arrive:

1) What is the most important single contribution you hope to make as a county legislator?

Chisari: First, to stop any and all property tax increases and second improve county services that the current County Executive and Legislature has cut while expanding their staffs.

Wink: Response pending.

2) What differences and similarities do you perceive among the communities in District 11, and how might these factors impact your service to those communities?

Chisari: The biggest similarity is the issue of property taxes, the County through the Legislature and the County Executive are oppressively taxing all communities in District 11 to the point that the people can no longer afford. Furthermore, each community is different with their own special needs, which as a County Legislator it would be my obligation to list and address each of those special needs.

Wink: Response pending.

3) What is your view of the county's role on the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee and the Manhasset Bay Protection Committee, and how would you advance the water quality improvement efforts of these inter-municipal organizations?

Chisari: I would led and effort by the County to secure more Federal and State grants to help further fund the projects.

Wink: Response pending.

4) How can the decay of the historic structures and gardens under county jurisdiction be reversed, and what would you do to encourage historic preservation in general?

Chisari: This is one area I feel very strongly about. I believe that preserving the County's historic sites is extremely important. First, the County must secure Federal and State grants that are available for this effort and second, stop the County Executive from cutting the staffs of these sites so he can hire political operatives for his personal staff as he has done in the pass with the full blessing of the Democratically control Legislature.

Wink: Response pending.

5) What is your policy on open space, and how would you protect open space in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head?

Chisari: I believe at this juncture in the County's development we must preserve the little open space that is left. The County must either fund an open space acquiring program or secure federal and state grants to fund such a project.

Wink: Response pending.

6) What role can the county play in reducing traffic congestion and sprawl, both countywide and in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing in particular?

Chisari: No answer provided.

Wink: Response pending.

7) What would you do to ensure that payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) and/or taxes on utility properties in Glenwood Landing are paid and not reduced?

Chisari: This is more an issue for the State Legislature than for the County Legislature as for the payments. The PILOTs are agreements that the utility has with either, the state or county and/or the local municipality. As for the amounts they are contractual and if they are reduced it is agreed upon by the parties involved. As a County Legislator I would make sure that the any amount owed under a PILOT will not be reduced and I would insure the utility pays the amount it originally agreed upon.

Wink: Response pending.

8) What is the county's most significant public safety and disaster vulnerability, and how would you address it?

Chisari: No answer provided.

Wink: Response pending.

9) What measures would you introduce to make county government more efficient and more accessible to the public?

Chisari: First, I believe that County government is very accessible to the public, but I feel that a Public Advocates Office charged with helping the citizens of the county navigate the municipal system is needed. Second, to make County government more efficient one party rule must end. In the last six years county government has cut the staffs of the Buildings Dept., Parks Dept. and Highway Dept., but the staffs of the County Executive and County Legislature has grown. I agree with the Governor waste must be sought out and stopped.

Wink: Response pending.

10) Are you willing to work in a bi-partisan manner, and what will you do to encourage bi-partisan cooperation among your colleagues?

Chisari: Yes, absolutely, but the thing I will never work bi-partisan on is any issue that would result in any type tax or county fee increase. I feel there will always be a better solution then raising taxes of county charged fees.

Wink: Response pending.

Candidates for Nassau County Legislative District 11 to Appear at League of Women Voters Meeting in Port Washington

The candidates for County Legislature in Nassau County Legislative District 11 will appear at the Port Washington Library tonight, Wednesday, March 21, at 8 p.m. The meeting is sponsored by the Port Washington-Manhasset League of Women Voters and will be held in the Lapham Meeting Room.

The Port Washington Library (883-4400) is located at One Library Drive, just off Main Street in Port Washington.

Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Submits Questions to Special Election Candidates in Nassau County Legislative District 11

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association has submitted the questions below to Louis Chisari (R, C) and Wayne Wink (D, I, WF), the two candidates who are seeking to represent Nassau County Legislative District 11 in the special election secheduled for Tuesday, March 27. We look forward to receiving reponses from both candidates and plan to post their answers. For more information about the special election, consult previous postings.

1) What is the most important single contribution you hope to make as a county legislator?

2) What differences and similarities do you perceive among the communities in District 11, and how might these factors impact your service to those communities?

3) What is your view of the county’s role on the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee and the Manhasset Bay Protection Committee, and how would you advance the water quality improvement efforts of these inter-municipal organizations?

4) How can the decay of the historic structures and gardens under county jurisdiction be reversed, and what would you do to encourage historic preservation in general?

5) What is your policy on open space, and how would you protect open space in Glenwood Landing and Glen Head?

6) What role can the county play in reducing traffic congestion and sprawl, both countywide and in Glen Head and Glenwood Landing in particular?

7) What would you do to ensure that payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) and/or taxes on utility properties in Glenwood Landing are paid and not reduced?

8) What is the county’s most significant public safety and disaster vulnerability, and how would you address it?

9) What measures would you introduce to make county government more efficient and more accessible to the public?

10) Are you willing to work in a bi-partisan manner, and what will you do to encourage bi-partisan cooperation among your colleagues?

Conservation League Endorses Wink

The New York League of Conservation Voters has endorsed Wayne Wink (D, I, WF) in the special election to fill the vacant seat in the county legislature. The other candidate is Louis Chisari (R, C). The vacancy is in District 11. All of Glenwood Landing and Roslyn Harbor and portions of Glen Head and Sea Cliff are in District 11.

The election will be held on Tuesday, March 27. Vote at your usual polling place. More information about the candidates and the special election can be found below in several previous postings.

To find out if your are in District 11 and where to vote, contact the Nassau County Board of Elections (571-2411)). The Board of Elections says it plans a mailing to households in District 11 notifying them about the election.

The election will decide which party holds the majority in the Nassau County Legislature, which is currently tied at 9 Republican seats and 9 Democratic seats.

For details about the NY League of Conservation Voter's endorsement of Mr. Wink, visit the league's website website.

Mr. Wink, who currently is a councilman on the North Hempstead Town Board, voted to deny the Glen Harbor application for a change of zone from industial use to multi-family residential use for the property on Shore Road in Glenwood Landing just south of the Glenwood Landing Power Station. The board ruled in favor of the applicant by a vote of 2 against, 5 in favor. At the time, Mr. Wink said he voted against the application because too many unanswered questions remained.

Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Supports Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor's County Open Space Bond Nominations

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association has lent its support to a Nassau County Open Space Bond application submitted to the county by the Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor. The application nominates several properties around Hempstead Harbor for open space acquisition, including the fully remediated propane field in Glenwood Landing. The propane field was recommend and accepted for acquisition under the first county bond act, but money was not appropriated to move forward with purchase.

For some reason, the county has required that properties accepted for acquistion under its last open space bond act but not purchased be renominated under the second bond. The propane field also has been accepted for acquisition under both of the Town of Oyster Bay's open space bonds, and TOB has received a state grant to direct to funding and reclamation of the property. Thus, several funding sources are in place. The holdup is anybody's guess. We understand that TOB also may have refiled an application for public acquisition of the propane field under the current county bond act.

Acquisition of the propane field and other Glenwood Landing waterfront properties would be consistent with the Glenwood Landing Waterfront Revitalization and Redevelopment Plane, the Water Quality Improvement Plan for Hempstead Harbor, and the Hempstead Harbor Management Plan. In addition, establishing a Glenwood Landing Waterfront Greenway is a specific priority cited in the New York State Open Space Plan, thanks largely to the efforts of the civic association and the support of the Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor and the Hempstead Harbor Protection Committee.

Text of Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor's nomination letter

The Coalition to Save Hempstead Harbor is pleased to have an opportunity to nominate four waterfront parcels of land along Hempstead Harbor for open-space acquisition and support the nominations for two other waterfront parcels. The acquisition of these parcels would be the most aggressive and significant action taken to date to help improve the water quality of Hempstead Harbor, improve and preserve the local habitat for marine life, birds, and other wildlife, and enhance the quality of life for over 46,000 residents who live in the communities immediately surrounding Hempstead Harbor, including Sands Point, Flower Hill, Roslyn, Roslyn Harbor, Glenwood Landing, Glen Head, Sea Cliff, and Glen Cove, as well as for thousands more in adjacent communities and beyond who work around Hempstead Harbor or use the harbor as a recreational resource.

Our nominations are for the Shore Realty property at Mott's Cove, the adjacent Glen Harbor property (formerly the Harbor Fuel site (aka HinFin property) south of the KeySpan plant on the southeast shore of Hempstead Harbor, the Gladsky property (marine salvage and marina) north of the KeySpan plant, and the Sea Isle property on the south side of Glen Cove Creek and adjacent to Brewer's Marina. The applications along with maps and photos for these sites are attached. We also support the applications for acquisition of the BITI, LLC property adjacent to the creek in Roslyn (referenced in our January 8, 2007, letter to you) and the KeySpan property (the two parcels adjacent to the Tappen Beach Park, nominated by the Town of Oyster Bay). Nominations for all six above-referenced properties are also supported by the Glenwood/Glen Head Civic Association (Patrice Benneward, President).

Several of these properties are threatened with imminent residential development. The irony is that as the ecosystem and habitat for Hempstead Harbor continue to improve, the development pressures increase. If development is allowed to proceed along the waterfront at a scale similar to that of the Bryant Landing development in Roslyn, for example, all that the stakeholders around Hempstead Harbor have worked long and hard to improve and preserve will be threatened with degradation once again–not from industrial assaults, but from overly dense residential development, which could have equally adverse impacts. (The once bucolic lower harbor now ends in a jarring view of large multistoried buildings that are in extreme contrast to the historic homes that dot the shore of Roslyn Harbor, including the William Cullen Bryant Estate at Cedarmere. The view corridor that once existed from the Roslyn Viaduct looking north to the harbor and Long Island Sound as you travel westbound is nearly obliterated.)

We fear that increased impervious land areas around the harbor and increased emissions from increased traffic will also increase storm-water runoff problems and compromise the harbor's water quality and habitat as well as change the human habitat from suburban–with critical recreational resources– to unchecked sprawl that is out of line with the municipal local waterfront redevelopment plans or shoreline studies that have been undertaken around the harbor (including the Hempstead Harbor Water Quality Improvement Plan, the Hempstead Harbor Management Plan, and the Glenwood Landing Waterfront Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan). This is also out of line with the county's new Healthy Nassau initiative.

In addition, local waterfront development projects have failed to adequately plan for building in flood zones in the past and do not address the future vagaries of climate change, global warming, and rising sea levels (see The New York Times, Real Estate, section 11, "The Real Riddle of Changing Weather: How Safe Is My Home," March 11, 2007). As the previously cited article states, the designation of a 100-year flood zone means "a flood has a 26 percent chance of occurring in any 30-year period." This combined with estimates of a 5-inch rise in sea level by 2030 can spell economic as well as environmental disaster for irresponsibly developed areas along the waterfront. (Also note that Allstate Insurance Company has pulled out of the Long Island residential market for new policies due to concerns about the risk of climate change on coastal properties.)

Our goal, simply put, is to preserve as much of the Hempstead Harbor waterfront as possible for open space or low impact use. We feel that this will be most in line with the desires of the stakeholders around the harbor, which has been designated by the New York State Coastal Management Plan as a significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat and cited by Audubon as a critical flyway for migratory birds. This action would also parallel efforts to create stewardship sites around Long Island Sound (Hempstead Harbor is one of the stewardship sites selected under the newly enacted Long Island Sound Stewardship Act). Further, by preserving these waterfront parcels, we can move forward with every harbor community's efforts to create a harborwide trailway, a soft shoreline, and wetlands restoration, which can all help to mitigate the damage from storm surge and flooding. (Note that the Town of North Hempstead has already made a significant investment in beach plantings, land acquisition, and the waterfront trail on the west shore of the harbor.) Also, establishing a Glenwood Landing Waterfront Greenway is a designated priority in the New York State Open Space Plan.

We would be happy to provide additional information on these parcels at a later date as you begin your examination of open-space nominations. If necessary, we would also be happy to elicit additional formal support by community members and groups for the above nominations.