Duchemin is a sergeant with the East Hampton Village Police and a member of the Sag Harbor Fire Department.

Long before petitions were due, both Stafford and Stein pledged a run for a second elected term on the board, although this will technically be Stein’s third term if elected. He was appointed to fill Mayor Brian Gilbride’s seat after Gilbride won his first bid as mayor in 2009.

Stafford is a lifelong resident of Sag Harbor and like Duchemin is a member of the Sag Harbor Fire Department. Stafford owns a landscaping business and as a member of the board of trustees has served as the liaison to the village’s Harbor Master Bob Bori. Stafford has also served on the board of the Sag Harbor United Methodist Church.

Stein, a child psychologist and member of both the Mashashimuet Park Board and the Bay Street Theatre Board of Trustees was on the first board for the not-for-profit community group Save Sag Harbor. As the liaison to the village’s wastewater treatment facility, Stein has upgraded that system and remains devoted to environmental issues as a member of the board.

In North Haven, the village election remains uncontested, according to village clerk Georgia Welch.

North Haven Mayor Laura Nolan will run uncontested to earn a sixth term. She is joined in seeking re-election by board members George Butts and Diane Skilbred.

Butts, an 18-year-member of the village’s zoning board of appeals, is seeking his third term. Skilbred, a 15-year-member of North Haven’s architectural review board, hopes to earn a second term in office.

Village elections will be held in both North Haven and Sag Harbor on June 19.

Photo by Susan Wawryk

There were few surprises during Election Night at the Bridgehampton School with the community coming out in favor of a proposed $10.7 million budget for 2012-2013 by a two-to-one margin and incumbent school board members finding the same level of support.

The Bridgehampton School Board’s proposed $10,696,364 – a 1.13 percent increase in spending over last year, was approved 109-to-54. The budget did not exceed New York State’s mandated two-percent property tax levy cap due to a 15-percent cut in spending across departments and with faculty, staff and administration agreeing to freeze their salaries over the course of the next year to avoid larger cuts in programming.

“It feels wonderful,” said Superintendent Dr. Lois Favre after the results were read Tuesday evening. “There is always some worry about the budget passing, but I think we did right by the community and we were fortunate enough to find they supported us once again.”

The community also supported the continued funding of the Bridgehampton Child Care and Recreation Center with $125,000 in funding over the next school year. That measure passed 109-to-53.

Incumbent school board members also found favor in Bridgehampton – a school district that in the last three years has evolved from a community debating the future of the Bridgehampton School to one that largely has the support of its residents.

Lillian Tyree-Johnson, the wife of Bridgehampton School basketball coach Carl Johnson and a resident for the last 20 years, earned the most votes, collecting 128-ballots in favor of her second elected term.

“It feels good because I believe we still have more to do as a board,” said Tyree-Johnson. “I think we are on a good path.”

Tyree-Johnson, who last ran in a heated contest divided by those who wished to keep the district’s high school intact and those who thought high school students should have the option to pay tuition to attend neighboring high schools, said seeing the communities support for Bridgehampton School through its approval of the budget was welcome news.

“The numbers were low in terms of turn out, probably because of the rain,” she said. “But it is nice to see that wide margin between the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ votes. We really have a great community.”

Doug DeGroot – a parent and owner of Buckskill Tennis Club in East Hampton – earned 122-votes in Tuesday night’s election.

“It feels like we have been rewarded for doing a good job,” he said. “I think we have worked well together for the last three years, which included the search for our Superintendent. I am happy to keep that going.

Ronald White, a parent and real estate agent, earned a second term on the school board with 120-votes. Challenger Gabriella Braia, a parent who saw eye-to-eye with her fellow candidates on most issues and ran for school board as a way to become a more intrinsic part of the school community, earned 61 votes. Bruce Dombkowski, a member of the Bridgehampton Fire District Board of Commissioners earned one write-in vote.

The next meeting of the Bridgehampton School Board will be held on Wednesday, May 30 at 7 p.m.

According to Mayor Nyce, the village board reached that agreement on Thursday and will discuss where the vessel should dock as well as a rate schedule in executive session during its Monday meeting.

In an interview on Monday, Mayor Nyce said that following a hearing where residents asked village officials to protect the shellfishing industry by siting the passenger ferry at Mitchell Park Marina, the village was moving in that very direction.

While supporting the service with a letter of consent, in order to ensure the pilot passenger ferry service is not held up for this season, Mayor Nyce said on Monday the board will likely discuss the terms of a final deal with the Hampton Jitney. He added that Greenport officials are working with the Village of Sag Harbor to ensure rates and responsibilities carried by the Hampton Jitney during this summer season are similar in both villages.

Mayor Nyce confirmed that both villages, by law, will have to charge the Hampton Jitney docking rates for the Peconic Bay Water Jitney, as municipalities cannot gift public property, but declined to reveal what rates the villages were considering until the contract was reviewed next Monday.

The Village of Greenport’s decision follows the Village of Sag Harbor, which last week also paved the way for what Lynch — the owner of the Hampton Jitney — has coined the Peconic Bay Water Jitney. The Sag Harbor Village Board, sans Deputy Mayor Tim Culver, temporarily amended its village-wide ban on passenger ferry service in Sag Harbor through October in an effort to give Lynch the opportunity to test the waters on a ferry services between the Twin Forks as an alternate transportation option on the East End.

In addition to the villages’ approval, the Peconic Bay Water Jitney must also receive a license from Suffolk County, which also has the right to approve the ferry’s rate schedule. Currently that is proposed as $20 round trip, $11 one-way per person. This week Suffolk County Legislator Jay Schneiderman said he was trying to ensure a 15-years and under children’s ticket was available at half price to ensure families could afford to use the service.

According to Legislator Schneiderman, the county will continue its review of the ferry service in June. Lynch and his partner, Jim Ryan of Response Marine, have said they would like to launch their service at the end of June and intend to run it through Labor Day, assessing its success after the final holiday weekend of the summer.

Sag Harbor residents have largely been divided on whether the ferry service, which will launch nine times a day on a 53-person catamaran off one side of the north end of Long Wharf and will dock overnight in Greenport, will be a detriment or benefit to the community. Mayor Nyce said residents in Greenport were “generally favorable” of the concept and particularly like the idea of increasing commerce in the downtown.

In response to some residents concerns, Sag Harbor Mayor Brian Gilbride spoke of developing a task force of village employees to study the impact the ferry has on traffic, parking and commerce — the three areas of concern raised by village residents during the debate over the ferry this spring.

On Monday night, the village’s Harbor Committee took that one step further, giving the proposal its seal of approval under the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP) under specific conditions. They also called on the village to develop a substantive way to assess the ferry’s impact.

Harbor Committee chairman Bruce Tait, who has been working with Planning Board Chairman Neil Slevin, said he would like the village to develop a metric based system to analyze the impacts to traffic, parking and commerce. Tait suggested the village should contract with a planning expert — like the village’s consultant Inter-Science Research Associates — to formalize those metrics so that the final study of the ferry is not subjective, but one based in fact.

Tait and Slevin envision the village team Mayor Gilbride suggested — the police chief, harbor master, superintendent of public works, village clerk and members of the Harbor Committee and Planning Board — could report to an expert conducting these traffic, parking and commerce studies.

The cost of the study, said Tait, should be born at least in part by the Hampton Jitney as they are a commercial entity that stands to profit from the proposal.

As an example, said Tait, one way to study parking and traffic impacts is to poll people using the ferry on how they got there — by car, by Jitney shuttle or by foot — and if they did come to Sag Harbor by car, ask where they parked. Similarly, ferry passengers could be asked to fill out basic information on where they shopped or ate in Sag Harbor while touring the village.

“This way at the end of the trial period we don’t have an assessment with people saying, ‘I like it,’ ‘I didn’t like it’,” said Tait. “We have metrics to measure this by.”

The Harbor Committee also formally approved the plan as consistent under several chapters of the LWRP, including those that promote the use of the village as a center of maritime activity, suitable for water dependent uses including specifically a ferry service, as well as a village that promotes access to the water and protects scenic resources and vistas.

One condition, however, was that the north end of Long Wharf, long used for fishing or simply gazing into the harbor, not be used by the ferry service.

While Tait argued the village could use the west side of Long Wharf for the ferry instead of the north end, after the meeting Harbor Master Bob Bori told Tait he did not believe the boat could safely navigate into the west side and would need to take a portion of the north end.

The Sag Harbor Village Board will review the Harbor Committee’s recommendation at its June 12 meeting where it is also expected Lynch will make a formal proposal to run the ferry service this summer off Long Wharf.

“Sag Harbor is a waterfront community with deep traditions in rowing,” said Attias. “Is that not why we have whaling races at HarborFest each year?”

Attias was joined by scores of other children and adults who are also part of the rowing club. She was responding to the friction that has emerged between the rowing club and the village, which has allowed the club to use the public park in Redwood as its base of operations for four years.

However, earlier this spring as the board of trustees renewed the not-for-profit’s license to use Cove Park, board members led by Mayor Brian Gilbride questioned whether Sag Harbor Community Rowing would be able to stay at the facility after 2012. The mayor cited continued calls by club owner Lee Oldak for the construction of a removable, floating dock as evidence that the group may be growing too large for the space.

At that March meeting, Mayor Gilbride suggested it may be time for the club to find a new home in Sag Harbor, perhaps at a location like Havens Beach.

On Tuesday, Attias implored the board to reconsider.

“Cove Park offers the best access to Sag Harbor Cove, the best protection for rowers and equipment,” she said, noting the club’s activities do not infringe on any other recreational pursuits in the cove and that the club continually invites members of the community to hop in a scull and join them on the water.

“Great job, ladies, and to the rest of the club that is all here,” Mayor Gilbride said after Attias finished her speech.

After the meeting, Mayor Gilbride said he had been informed children at the rowing club were being told that the Mayor of Sag Harbor did not support them and was unnerved by that kind of action.

“We let them stay there this year and what we said was they are growing at such a rate that it might not be the right spot next season,” he said, adding he does see the value of the rowing club in providing students an opportunity to compete in a sport that can help them get into college.

“I think the kids are doing a wonderful job,” said Mayor Gilbride. “If the owner can stay under the radar and the club doesn’t grow much larger I think they will be fine at Cove Park.”

On Wednesday, Oldak said the reason he brought students to the village board meeting was to present the true face of Sag Harbor Community Rowing— the children who compete under its banner.

“This is primarily a program for children,” said Oldak. “We are not too big for that park and none of the neighbors have complained about us using it.”

Oldak said the program serves about 30 students from Sag Harbor, Bridgehampton, East Hampton and Springs, as well as about six adults.

“Cove Park was an underused park,” added Oldak. “No one knew about it. I think we brought to light what a great park it is.”

It is now legal in Sag Harbor Village to apply for a permit to run a passenger ferry service.

That is for now, anyway.

At Tuesday night’s Sag Harbor Village Board of Trustees meeting that board voted 4-to-1 to amend village code to allow passenger ferry service in the village between now and October 31. Under the village code, both passenger and vehicular ferry service was prohibited in Sag Harbor. Once this new local law sunsets in October, the village board would have to introduce new legislation to extend the allowance or discontinue it.

That will hinge on the success or failure of the Peconic Bay Water Jitney, a Sag Harbor to Greenport passenger ferry service that Hampton Jitney president Geoffrey Lynch and Response Marine’s Jim Ryan hope to launch this summer as a pilot program to study the success — and impact — of a passenger ferry service on the East End.

Lynch and Ryan have proposed a passenger ferry service that would dock in Greenport Village, but offer service to Sag Harbor via Long Wharf. The ferry would offer around nine round trips between the two villages starting at 7 a.m. and would utilize a low wake catamaran Lynch intends to lease from New York Water Taxi. The catamaran can hold 53 people.

Lynch has proposed a Hampton Jitney shuttle service connecting to Suffolk County Transit buses and will offer service between Sag Harbor, Bridgehampton and East Hampton in an effort to reduce traffic and parking connected with the ferry. Lynch said he is also in talks with the Sag Harbor School District to lease a parking lot on Montauk Avenue where passengers will be encouraged to park and board a bus to Marine Park. From there, they would then walk to the ferry on Long Wharf.

On Tuesday night, the Sag Harbor Village Board remained resolute in their support of the proposal, particularly in the concept of it being a pilot program that can be scrapped come the fall if it proves too burdensome on village residents or businesses.

Mayor Brian Gilbride said he has already formed a committee including Sag Harbor Village Police Chief Tom Fabiano, Village Clerk Beth Kamper, Superintendent of Public Works Dee Yardley, Harbor Master Bob Bori and Planning Board Chairman Neil Slevin to study the impact of the ferry this summer. Mayor Gilbride said he would also welcome any other members of the village boards to join that effort as well as a business owner representing the Sag Harbor Chamber of Commerce.

Trustee Robby Stein said that many of the questions raised during the public debate surrounding the ferry, including impacts to traffic, parking, the environment and village liability, were valid, but that passenger ferry service is a concept being batted around nationally as a new mode of transportation.

“I do want more answers from the Jitney, but I want to try this,” said Stein.

“It is always easier to say no to something,” said trustee Ed Gregory, who said he would like the community to have a chance to assess the service before it passes judgment.

“And if it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t work out, but we will never know if we close the door on this process,” said Gregory.

“This is a waterfront village,” said trustee Bruce Stafford, adding parking in Sag Harbor has been an issue since he was born.

The lone dissenter on the board was Deputy Mayor Tim Culver, although he praised the village board for taking the initiative to try a service like this in an effort to study it rather than rely on traffic models drafted by consultants in offices.

“I will say every neighbor of mine on High Street and Bay Street has come up to me and really objected and opposed the ferry,” said Culver, noting it will likely be the most impacted residential community in the village.

While the vote passed, the proposal will still be vetted as a formal application by the village board, said Sag Harbor Village Attorney Fred W. Thiele, Jr. Lynch will also need the approval of Suffolk County for the ferry’s charter and fee schedule, as well as a nod from the Village of Greenport, which must approve where the boat can dock, before the Peconic Bay Water Jitney becomes a reality.

Since it was first proposed, the idea has sharply divided many in the Sag Harbor community. Tuesday night was no different.

Former Sag Harbor Mayor Pierce Hance criticized board members for not attending the hearings on the county level about the ferry service nor a Sag Harbor Chamber of Commerce dinner last week where several business owners expressed concern about the negative impact it could have on their way of life.

Hance added that Lynch is seeking a five year license from the county, not one for six months, and said that details regarding the landing of the vessel on Long Wharf remained murky.

Holding a village code, Hance noted that of all allowed businesses and uses in Sag Harbor only three are expressly prohibited: nightclubs, large uses like nursing homes and, of course, ferries.

“If you really want to consider one of the three things precluded in this document and allow them a special permit to see if it works I think someone should come back with a six month permit for a nightclub,” said Hance, adding he did not believe this was a well planned project, but one that would make Sag Harbor a “guinea pig.”

As the administrator of the Custom House, Ann Lieber disagreed.

“We used to have a ferry that came from Connecticut and people went to lunch and to the stores and the Custom House,” said Lieber. “I think the ferry would be a wonderful idea. Not only would it support stores and restaurants, but our historic places. It’s only for this summer we are trying, so why not give it a shot? I know I would love to take it to Greenport.”

Dr. Tom Halton, a member of the village’s Harbor Committee, agreed that giving it a try was the best course of action. That committee sent a memo of support for the pilot program earlier this spring.

Former board member Jennifer Houser disagreed sharply questioning the planning that has been completed to assess the ferry service. Houser also noted that surrounding communities on the South Fork have long shunned passenger ferry service because it is not desirable.

“Sag Harbor doesn’t want it either,” she said.

Houser asked whether the Town of Southampton, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the Peconic Baykeeper or the Environmental Protection Agency had weighed in on the ferry. She also asked whether a formal Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan consistency review had been completed by the Harbor Committee.

“In fact what review process is in place and has been contracted for on the village level,” asked Houser, wondering who was liable if there was an accident or gas spill and who would monitor the moving ferry.

“I hope you realize there are too many issues adrift to stand behind this idea,” said Houser.

High Street resident Tim Martin presented the board with a petition against the ferry.

“Part of the reason I moved to High Street from Jermain was the traffic,” he said, adding he did not see the commercial benefit of the ferry service except for the Hampton Jitney.

“Only one person that I showed the petition to said they did not want to sign it, so it was pretty overwhelming,” said Martin.

Margia Kramer said new businesses, many paying high rents, would suffer if the service is allowed believing it will create parking issues throughout the village. She called for a village referendum before trustees considered the idea seriously.

“It is just silly,” said Kramer. “Why say, ‘Just do it, just try it’ when it can have an adverse impact on people doing business here.”

Another Division Street resident said he supported the idea because it was “forward thinking” and suggested an account could be set aside by the Hampton Jitney in the wake of a problem to cover any costs.

“Parking has always been a problem, will always be a problem,” he added.

“I have lived in Sag Harbor for 10 years,” said Steve Frankel, whose wife Debbie Rudoy owns life’style clothing boutique on Main Street. “I am listening to all these ideas being put forth and a lot of them are not based on facts. They are romantic notions of what could be, should be and won’t be.”

Frankel said this was not an “experiment” to be considered but something that could truly hurt businesses.

“My wife has a business on Main Street and she is scared to death because she knows if people cannot find parking they will not stop here,” said Frankel. “Most things in this village happen very slowly because things are considered very carefully, so it seems out of character to me that there is the decision being made to try this experiment this summer.”

Not wanting to continue to defend his plan, Lynch said he commended the board for considering the proposal.

“I believe it is forward thinking and there are a lot of transportation advocates that have come up with a lot of ideas and there have been a lot of studies,” he said. “I think it is time we try something out.”

“We are a waterfront village,” agreed Kate Plumb. “If it doesn’t work out we won’t do it again, but we are not going to know what the consequences are unless we try it.”

The Sag Harbor Village Planning Board has not yet decided whether a proposal to expand the Harbor Heights Service Station on Route 114 has the potential to cause a significant environmental impact. So on Tuesday night, the board asked developers to provide more information. Specifically, they’d like to see more detail in terms of traffic, noise and the impact the project could have on the character of the surrounding residential neighborhood.

Owner John Leonard has proposed to demolish the existing Harbor Heights building and construct a new gas station and convenience store on the property. He is also proposing to slightly expand the adjoining Sag Harbor Service Station and move gas pump islands further into the property.

While the project has had support, it has also been met with opposition by some neighbors as well as the not-for-profit Save Sag Harbor. That group recently hired East Hampton attorney Jeff Bragman to represent them while the planning and zoning boards review’s Leonard’s application.

Before the zoning board of appeals can weigh in on a number of variances needed for Leonard to move forward — most importantly deciding whether or not he should be able to construct a convenience store several hundred square-feet larger than what is allowed under the village code — the planning board must determine if the project should be subject to comprehensive environmental review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act.

On Tuesday night, the planning board continued that debate, with Bragman seated in the audience taking notes.

Leonard’s engineer, Chris Tartaglia, presented a new landscape plan that doubles the number of white pines Leonard proposes to plant around the perimeter of the property. Tartaglia said Leonard has also agreed to eliminate a number of perimeter lights and presented a noise study that he said showed once the Sag Harbor Service Station is able to move much of its work indoors, as proposed, noise levels will be reduced.

Tartaglia added that any new noise generated from people using the store or gas station at extended hours falls below a decibel level the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) deems “an adverse noise impact.”

Sag Harbor Village Environmental Planning Consultant Rich Warren said he would also like to see a study that addresses the potential noise impact when considering the ambient noise levels of the residential neighborhood. As the project moves the station further onto the property and towards houses, that should be assessed, said Warren.

In terms of other impacts, board member Gregory Ferraris said he would like to see details presented on a drainage trench meant to catch stormwater runoff, but also oil in the event of a spill, in order to ensure Havens Beach would be protected if such an event occurred.

Board chairman Neil Slevin said he would like the village’s historic preservation and architectural review board (ARB) to weigh in on the impact the project could have on the character of the neighborhood and aesthetic resources. He noted that resident Elinor Spalten had sent in photographs of a similar station and store in Georgia and that the images had an impact he would like the ARB to discuss.

While a traffic report states that the project is expected to increase car trips to the property by 10 cars in the morning and 15 in the evening hours, Slevin questioned whether or not traffic would increase more because of the addition of the store.

“I don’t think people will come from somewhere else just to go to the convenience store,” said board member Jack Tagliasachhi.

“I think we would be kidding ourselves to think there would be no increase in traffic as a result of this project,” said Ferraris.

Tartaglia’s study, said Warren, states that only three additional cars would come to the improved station if it includes a store. Warren said the board could ask for a study based on local stations rather than the industry standard.

The next Sag Harbor Village Planning Board meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 22 at 5 :30 p.m.

Grand Street resident Mare Dianora appeared before the planning board with an application to keep three chickens in a 74-by-39-inch coop and small adjoining pen.

Dianora pursued this legislation last year with the hopes of raising her own chickens for eggs, fertilizer and for the delight of her young son, Finny, who has been an eager attendant at all meetings in the village regarding chickens, clutching a stuffed yellow chicken as a sign of his support.

Under the village’s chicken law, people in residential districts can keep up to six chickens per 20,000 square-feet of lot area, or just shy of a half acre of land. Residents will not be able to have more than 18 chickens on their property, regardless of its size, and the sale of any poultry items, including eggs is prohibited.

The village has also regulated the size and setbacks for coops to protect neighbors.

Roosters are also prohibited and under the law residents must apply for a special exception permit through the planning board, meaning they have to go through a public hearing process to ensure if neighbors are against a proposal they have an opportunity to speak.

“I think everything in this application meets our criteria,” said board member Greg Ferraris.

According to village attorney Denise Schoen, if a public hearing on Dianora’s plans is met without protest she can expect the planning board to adopt an approval at its May 22 meeting.

The planning board will also hold a public hearing on a proposal by Rich Kresberg to expand Provisions Natural Foods Market & Organic Café into the former Style Bar on Bay Street.

Provisions currently occupies 2,450 square-feet of a multi-use building on Main and Bay streets. Kresberg hopes to annex the adjacent 777 square-feet of the former Style Bar space and add to the grocery store portion of Provisions and reconfigure its health-food centric café.

Kresberg does not plan to increase the number of seats in the café, said attorney Dennis Downes at last month’s meeting.

If the public hearing next month is met without opposition, Kresberg can expect an on-the-spot approval, said Schoen.

The Sag Harbor Planning Board will meet on May 22 at 5:30 p.m.

That was the question the Sag Harbor Village Planning Board considered on Tuesday night. While the discussion was preliminary and brief, members warmed to the idea that the historic Gingerbread House on Main Street could be preserved while hosting La Maisonette on the first floor and a second floor residential use.

The Gingerbread House dates back to 1840. It was at the center of a Sag Harbor development controversy in 2004 when then owner Jon Gruen proposed to demolish the neighboring 127 Main Street and build a new two story structure residents feared would overshadow the Gingerbread House and the historic Latham House.

That proposal eventually gave way and 127 Main Street was purchased by James Giorgio, a local real estate developer who added a modest addition to the back of the building in a proposal largely supported by residents.

According to La Masionette owner Lynn Park Charveriat’s attorney, Dennis Downes — who represented Gruen and later Giorgio — while the Gingerbread House has been on the market since 2007 it has failed to find a buyer. However, Charverait is interested in opening her store on the first floor of the building and would not expand it’s footprint.

In order to do so she would need approval from the Sag Harbor Planning Board for a change of use to allow commercial retail on the first floor of what is considered a two-family residence.

Downes said there has been discussion about digging out along the side of the front yard to create a space in the basement of the residence, but that has not been fully explored.

“It does seem consistent with neighboring properties,” said board member Greg Ferraris about adding a commercial element to the building.

Formal plans will have to be submitted to the board for review.

In other news, Dean Golden presented updated plans for the renovation of the building that contains Sen Restaurant on Main Street.

The building’s owner, Jeff Resnik, has proposed the construction of a 550-square-foot first floor addition on the eastern side of the three story building in an area that now is used as a storage shed. That construction is aimed at increasing the size of the existing kitchen and will allow for the redesign of bathroom and bar areas in the restaurant.

It is also proposed that the building be expanded on the second and third floors, by 590-square-feet and 488 square-feet, respectively, to expand and reconfigure two existing apartments.

Throughout Tuesday night’s meeting, Golden stressed the number of seats in the restaurant and bedrooms in the apartments would not increase, protecting the application from needing to meet additional requirements in terms of parking or a new septic system.

Sag Harbor Environmental Planning Consultant Rich Warren said he would like Golden to provide the board with a break down of the square footage throughout the building to ensure the project does not trigger a 3,000 square-foot limitation on expansion in commercial buildings within the village.

“It’s a pretty tight site,” he added, asking Golden also provide a plan for construction staging to ensure precious village parking spaces are not usurped by construction if it is approved by the board.

Ferraris said he would like to see more detail provided in terms of the expansion of the residential units and the restaurant to ensure that parking was being met. In addition to the number of seats in a restaurant, he noted, the village requires parking spaces for employees meaning if Sen Restaurant intends to hire more people once the kitchen is expanded they may need to seek a variance from the village zoning board of appeals.

Golden said the Sen Restaurant kitchen was so crammed as it exists today that they have to have more people in the kitchen to accomplish what they need to. With more space, employees will be able to move more freely and take on more tasks, he said.

Village attorney Denise Schoen added that Golden had already met with building inspector Tim Platt who did not believe the project would trigger the need for more parking.

“As far as the staging of construction, that is something we would be foolhardy not to consider,” agreed Golden, adding the project would be constructed in the off-season and likely in two phases.

The Larry Rivers sculpture “Legs” was given walking papers at the Sag Harbor Village Zoning Board of Appeals meeting on Tuesday. The board denied an application by Janet Lehr and Ruth Vered to legalize the 16-foot sculpture, which was erected three years ago next to their Madison Street home.

According to Sag Harbor Village Zoning Board of Appeals Chairwoman Gayle Pickering, the “Legs” must be removed by September 15.

The battle over whether the sculpture should be allowed to remain on Lehr and Vered’s property, however, may be far from over.

“We have a Plan B that will put the burden of proof on the village,” said Lehr, hinting at possible litigation over the case. “It will be costly and expensive for the village.”

The “Legs” case has captured the attention of local residents, but has also spanned the globe in terms of media coverage, mainly because of the core argument that Lehr and Vered have made — that the sculpture is art, and not something that should fall under the purview of zoning regulations.

But the Village of Sag Harbor’s Board of Trustees denied a request by Lehr and Vered last year to define art under the village code. Village Building Inspector Tim Platt has continuously ruled that the “Legs” are in fact an accessory structure, and as such needed three variances from the zoning board in order to remain alongside Lehr and Vered’s residence, the former Bethel Baptist Church. The “Legs” are located a foot from the property line where 35-feet is required, and are seated at 16.1-feet high where 15-feet is the maximum allowed. The sculpture also protrudes into the sky plane 16.7 cubic feet more than allowed under the code.

In addition to seeking those variances, Lehr and Vered also asked the board to consider nullifying Platt’s definition of the “Legs” as a structure. After a protracted debate on Tuesday, Lehr and Vered were denied on all fronts.

“In all the years I have been here on this board I have never had a variance ask for that much relief,” said board member Anton Hagen, referring to the request for a variance to allow the “Legs” within a foot of the property line where 35-feet are required. “It goes against all other decisions I have made in 10 years on this board.”

“I feel the same,” said board member Brendan Skislock. “If they were looking for one or two feet of relief it would be different.”

The remainder of the board, with the exception of Michael Bromberg who has recused himself from ruling on the case since a family member owns a neighboring parcel, agreed the application should be denied.

In reading the decision, Pickering said deciding whether or not Platt erred in classifying the “Legs” as a sculpture would have required the board to consider whether or not the decision was “irrational or unreasonable.” The code defines a structure as “anything constructed or erected in the ground or upon another structure or building,” and as the board’s decision notes the “Legs” meet the definition of “anything.”

She added that the board’s analysis was also driven by a court case out of the Town of Southold, Miller versus Price, where the town decided that a sculpture of a heron needed a building permit. The town was sued but the decision was ultimately supported on the appellate level of the State Supreme Court.

“We are not persuaded by the argument that a sculpture is ‘art; and therefore somehow exempt from the Village Zoning Code,” reads the board’s decision. “A sculpture can be both ‘art’ and a structure subject to zoning. There is nothing in the Sag Harbor Village Zoning Code that exempts ‘art’ from the definition of a structure. Further, the concept of a local government determining what does and does not constitute ‘art’ would present a constitutional conundrum that government must avoid. ‘Art,’ like ‘beauty’ is in the eye of the beholder and is not something to be legislated.”

As for the rest of the variances, the board had to consider whether the benefit to Lehr and Vered outweighed the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community and if it would result in an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood.

“We are concerned about allowing a structure one-foot from the property line and the precedent that would set,” said Pickering.

She added neighbors have “vehemently opposed the application.” At public hearings earlier this year, Lehr and Vered received ample community support, but neighbors spoke against the application citing the size of the sculpture, the location just a foot from the property line and the fact that it is lit in the evening hours. Because of those factors, the board said the “Legs” would result in an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood and that the detriment to neighbors and the community outweighs the benefit to Lehr and Vered.

The decision also states that the location of the proposed structure in the historic district is “contrary to the goals of the village to preserve and protect historic character” and that Lehr and Vered have other alternatives in how they display the sculpture.

“Sag Harbor has been a center of culture and the arts,” reads the decision. “It is part of the village’s character and commerce. The arts have thrived in the village’s environment. Art galleries are a permitted use in the village business district. Art studios are a permitted use in the residential district and the display of art on public lands is encouraged. Finally, sculptures may be displayed on individual residential properties provided it is in a conforming location. In summary, there are a variety of options for the display of a sculpture in the village that do not run afoul of the village zoning code.”

While the village attorney, Denise Schoen, suggested the sculpture come down some time in the next 60 days, with the zoning board’s support Pickering said the “Legs” could remain until September 15.

“All artificial lighting of the structure shall be discontinued immediately,” she added.

After the decision was read, while walking out of the room Vered called the board “a bunch of chickens.”

Outside the board room she said the lighting of the sculpture, on the Henry Street side of her residence, provides needed street lighting on an otherwise unlit portion of the village. She also wondered why that lighting was so undesirable when the village is considering allowing a new convenience store and remodeled gas station at Harbor Heights on Route 114, which will come with new lighting on the edge of a residential neighborhood.

“They should pay me to have the lights and the sculpture,” said Vered.

She later returned to the boardroom and questioned two additional variance applications, including one for board member Skislock, saying they should not be approved because the applications did not adhere to the letter of the village zoning code.

“That is what variances are for,” said Bromberg.

After both applications were approved on first hearing, with decisions expected next month, Vered threw up her hands while walking out of the boardroom.

“What a surprise,” she said. “So fast, so fast.”

The numbers are now in after the Sag Harbor Village Trustees unanimously adopted the general fund budget for the 2012-2013 fiscal year.

Several work sessions were held by the trustees in February and March to put together the budget. It was ultimately passed this Tuesday, April 10.

According to village documents, Sag Harbor will operate on a budget of $8,056,311, a 2.78 percent increase from the $7,838.023 budget used for the 2011-2012 fiscal year. This revised budget is scheduled to cover nearly all village expenditures from June 1, 2012 until May 31, 2013.

In addition to the operating budget, the trustees also passed a separate $505,224 expenditure for the villages sewer fund.

The majority of the operating budget, well over $5 million, will be paid for with real property tax revenues.

According to village documents, the total assessed value of the property in the village has now reached over 2.2 billion dollars. The taxable portion of this property increased by $793,143 over the past year to reach just under $2 billion.