Two public hearings held before the East Hampton Town Board last week were relatively muted affairs considering their often-controversial topics: traffic and landscape lighting.
In 1971, at the intersection of Three Mile Harbor Road and Springs-Fireplace Road, the town acquired a piece of land from the Lions Club, and a year later, an adjacent parcel from Edwin Sherrill. The two-acre lot that was created from the combination, a wedge known as Sherrill Triangle, divided the two roads, and was later added to the town’s inventory of nature preserves.
Surely no one could have imagined the traffic at the intersection 50 years later.
Suffolk County will soon begin making improvements to Three Mile Harbor Road, also identified on maps as County Road 40. The town board wants the county to include a traffic circle at the wedge, and with that goal, asked the State Legislature to eliminate the nature preserve designation from the parcel. That request was granted, but now the town needs to strike down its own parkland classification. Hence the public hearing.
“Removing the nature preserve designation will make the property available for installation of highway improvements,” read the notice of the hearing.
Jonathan Foster, whose grandfather, Edwin Sherrill Sr., donated part of the triangle to the town, objected strongly. “The traffic circle proposed for North Main Street is an awful idea,” he said. Mr. Foster spoke of the area’s history, fondly recalling horses grazing on tall grass in the triangle. “The Sherrill Triangle should be returned to its pasture look,” he said, suggesting, rather than a roundabout, a “smart traffic light.”
“I’m also opposed to alienating parkland to create a roundabout on North Main Street,” said Jeffrey Bragman, an attorney. “It seems that the board is very intent on remaking the way East Hampton looks, with the goal of creating a number of roundabouts, so that we’re a roundabout town. It should not be a goal of this town board, and a priority, to make life better for the cars that come out here. That’s not why people come out here.”
The 2005 Comprehensive Plan had as a stated goal the reduction of reliance on the automobile, Mr. Bragman reminded the board. “I would suggest that should be your priority, not making the cars run smoother. Our roads look the way they do because they reflect our history. Don’t change the character of our town in this way.”
“Making it easier to move faster through the town of East Hampton is not necessarily a wise move,” warned David Buda of Springs. “Rather than make a roundabout, make a right-angle intersection with a stop sign.”
Betsy Petroski, who lives nearby, agreed with Mr. Buda that the board should start small. “Test the viability of a three or four-way stop sign or traffic light,” she said. “Keep it green, do no harm. Maintain the historic character of our Freetown neighborhood and Historic Springs.”
A roundabout did have its proponents. “The only wildlife in those woods is the beer drinkers who leave their cans behind,” said Katy Casey, an immediate neighbor of the proposed circle. “I don’t look at it as making life easier for cars. I see it as making it easier for people like me who have to work.” She envisioned a circle as a formal welcome to Springs. “Something of an entryway, if it’s tastefully done,” she said.
“You just take your life in your hands trying to walk, or have a bicycle or anything,” said Prudence Carabine of the East Hampton Historical Farm Museum nearby. “It’s incredibly unstabilizing for those of us who are out there. There’s a sense of catastrophe that’s going to happen at any minute. North Main Street has a great deal of history, but we also need to take normal steps to protect people’s lives.”
As for the landscape lighting proposal, each tree or shrub would be limited to 550 lumens as opposed to 1,000, with a maximum Kelvin rating of 2,700. Lights would have to be extinguished at 11 p.m. rather than at midnight. Only two members of the public spoke out on those changes, and both said the law should be stricter.
Susan Harder, a lighting designer who is active with Dark Sky International, said that lowering the Kelvin rating from the proposed 2,700 would be beneficial for all concerned. “Kelvin rated between 1,100 to 2,200 is much better for night vision and the overall environment,” she said.
“Some history,” she continued. “Initially, the original law, as drafted, included regulations on foliage/tree lighting. But at the hearing, after dozens of residents and environmental organization representatives spoke in favor of enactment, one person, having just installed dozens of tree uplights, objected. Instead of amending that provision, it was entirely removed.”
She sent “a list of amendments that needed to be considered as updates to the entire lighting code, delivered by letter, many months ago to Councilmember Rogers. I never received a response.”
“I believe during the work session at least one, if not more, of the town board members referred repeatedly to tree lighting as ‘unnecessary,’ “ said Ms. Harder. “It would be great if the code that prohibits uplighting over all would cover tree lighting and ban it altogether. But I know that taking things away from people is very difficult, so I’m not going to advocate for that right now.”
She did, however, ask the board to consider requiring setbacks for tree uplighting, saying it “could make a material difference,” and pushed for still fewer light-up hours. “Moving from midnight to 11 p.m. doesn’t make that much of a difference,” she said. “I would recommend 9 p.m., because some people like to relax outside or take a walk to enjoy the skies and not see lights.”
Councilwoman Rogers later texted The Star to say that the board had indeed considered making 9 p.m. the cutoff for outdoor lights. “Many of our working families work very long hours and we want them to have an opportunity to enjoy their yards as well,” she wrote. “We are most concerned when folks are using this lighting as dusk-to-dawn lighting, which is prohibited.”
