The design of the planned East Hampton Town senior citizens center, or Center for Modern Aging, on Abraham’s Path never did sit right — not with the general public, not with its future patrons, and not with budget-watchers. Now comes a crisis point that any policymaker with common sense would grab as an excuse to change direction.
For three years now, criticisms have rained down on the building designed by R2 Architecture, a joint venture between Ross Barney Architects of Chicago and Ronnette Riley Architect of New York City and Bridgehampton: The soaring ceilings in the original design would gobble air-conditioning energy, people said; the main parking lot seemed rather a long walk from the main entrance, and the building’s shape, a spoke meant to evoke the arms of a windmill, would seem to preclude future expansions to the building (and could only be recognized from the sky by passing pilots).
Changes were announced in August 2024. Ceiling height was reduced from 25 feet down to 15 feet, “to bring more intimacy into the room,” according to one of the architects. Instead of expensive stainless-steel shingles and wood, the exterior would have an off-white composite board-and-batten coastal look. A solar-panel canopy in the parking area could be switched out for less-costly rooftop panels.
Meanwhile, a political fight arose surrounding supervision of the project and its environmental impact. Town Hall seemed hell-bent on forcing the project through. It exempted itself from zoning and land-use regulatory review, raising further cries of alarm in The Star’s letters to the editor, and graciously granted itself a “negative declaration” under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, meaning a detailed environmental review would not be required. It went ahead with clear-cutting acres of the site, important habitat for an endangered bat.
Then came news this month that the principal architects of R2 were suing each other. Construction has not begun. According to one of them, Ronnette Riley, it in fact cannot begin because only 30 percent of the drawings have been completed.
It’s time to cut bait.
The arguing architects have already been paid $1.3 million out of what was initially reported to be a total design fee of $1.6 million. Even if the remaining 19.75 percent had to be shelled out to them, canceling the project as currently envisioned could be the cheaper option. Let’s not forget that R2 was also reportedly going to be paid to supervise the job, being offered 10 percent of the total construction cost; with a projected cost above $30 million, before overruns, the town would potentially have had to pay R2 up to another $4 million.
The senior center should be scaled back and rethought. The whole thing has turned into a true boondoggle; but, yes, changing the plan now can still be done at less expense to taxpayers, we believe.
The town could work with a local architect or, even better, an architect from anywhere in the coastal mid-Atlantic familiar with our vernacular who, unlike R2, has experience in designing with the needs of an older population in mind (how sound travels in large rooms used by the hearing impaired, or the impact of glare on eyesight). Construct a building that is modern, yes, but cozy, not cavernous, and designed so that it can be added onto in the future if need be.
This should not be the hill upon which the supervisor and town board’s political careers die. Decisive action right now would be not just politically expedient, it would be the right thing to do for the older residents (and all taxpayers) of East Hampton.