An Amagansett man who was arrested in July for trespassing on Cartwright Shoal, a tidal peninsula in Gardiner’s Bay, was buoyed by last Thursday’s presentation by the Suffolk County district attorney’s office that he said did not include proof that the shoal is privately owned. 

Rod Richardson of Amagansett had removed two “no trespassing” signs from the sand spit, which police said is part of Gardiner’s Island, owned by the Goelet family trust, on July 25. He was charged with third-degree criminal tampering, a misdemeanor, and trespass, a violation. He has vehemently argued, however, that Cartwright Shoal is public property, citing his own research. “I understand the whole island and foreshore to be owned by the people of New York, who have every right to visit and enjoy this local treasure,” he said following his arrest. 

Last week, Mr. Richardson said in a statement that the prosecution’s discovery file contained only the original charging documents filled out by the Goelet family’s security personnel and arresting officers, as well as a video of the incident recorded by the security personnel. “The file contained no deeds, royal grants, or anything that would establish ownership rights,” he said. He is moving to have the charges against him dismissed, and a judge is to respond to that motion on Feb. 7. 

Mr. Richardson has asked the East Hampton Town Trustees, who have jurisdiction over many of the town’s beaches, waterways, and bottomlands, to support his effort to overturn what he has called an improper land grab. 

At the trustees’ meeting on Friday, Steve Boerner, a real property consultant engaged by the trustees to try to determine ownership and public access rights with respect to Cartwright Shoal and Gardiner’s Island, issued a preliminary report. “At this point in the investigation, I feel that title to Cartwright Island is still with the Gardiners,” he said. “I feel that it’s part of that complex, at this point.” With respect to bottomlands, “I’m not seeing any documentation to that.” 

“So what would be the water-ward boundary of the island?” asked Rick Drew of the trustees. “Is it mean high tide, is it mean low tide?” At the moment, Mr. Boerner said, and barring discovery of a document stating otherwise, “I’d have to say like everywhere else in New York State, the foreshore is within the State of New York.” The property’s boundary, in other words, is the mean high-water mark, he believes. 

“Wouldn’t the public trust doctrine go in there?” asked Bill Taylor, a trustee, referring to the doctrine asserting public use of resources, including shorelines, regardless of private property ownership. “That was part of English law before they granted these patents, where the land between low water and high water belonged to the crown, and was transferred to the state, and it’s open to all people. That’s still in effect?” 

A reading of colonial-era patents such as the Dongan Patent, the 1686 document that created the trustees and conferred ownership of common lands on behalf of the public, indicate “foreshore rights to the public,” Mr. Boerner said. But, he cautioned, “right now, my priority was to find the specifics of the boundary descriptions.” 

Mr. Richardson believes that that preliminary opinion bolsters his contention that public trust rights dictate that the foreshore of Cartwright Shoal is public property. “We’re very much focused here on who owns Cartwright, as if that makes a difference,” he told the trustees. “You may have public or private ownership of a bottomland, but that doesn’t mean people can’t sail across those waters. That’s the same with the foreshore of an intertidal land.”

He quoted from “Vanishing Tidelands: Land Use and the Law in Suffolk County, N.Y., 1650-1979,” published in 1980. “ ‘In People versus Staten Island Ferry,’ ” he read, “ ‘the court clearly held that even though the king could grant submerged lands as private property, his grant was subject to the paramount right of the public to use the navigable waters, which he could neither destroy nor abridge.’ In other words, it really doesn’t matter, this search into who owns it, because the public trust rights to public access still exist. I would hope the trustees would champion that public right irrespective of who owns the island.” 

Nonetheless, he added on Tuesday that he hoped Mr. Boerner’s report would address fact-based questions such as whether or not the Goelet family has “clear, explicit, unambiguous title, in the form of a royal grant or deed” to Cartwright Shoal. “The answer to that question should be a core conclusion,” he said in an email. 

Mr. Boerner told the trustees that his research would continue.

Springs residents turned out last Thursday for an East Hampton Town Board hearing on the future of their hamlet, however their comments were dominated by worries about the future of a commercial area just beyond the official Springs line.

The Springs-Fireplace Road corridor that reaches from North Main Street to Abraham’s Path was by far the area of greatest concern of the roughly 60 people at Town Hall to talk about the last stage of a new Springs hamlet study that will be incorporated into East Hampton’s comprehensive plan. They shared a sense that the town has not adequately addressed the problems along that stretch of county road and that the new ideas in the hamlet study would make things worse.

A proposed redevelopment described in the study includes new retail shops on the roadside and continued industrial uses and a new truck parking and contractors’ services area toward the middle of the site. There might be “live-work” housing, parks and trails, a food production zone, farmland, and new replanted view “buffers.” The commercial vehicle parking idea would require a new zoning classification. Reworking the properties would take a committed dialogue between town officials and the landowner, the authors wrote.

“The studies do not go far enough to protect the gateway to Springs,” said Carl Irace, an East Hampton lawyer representing Citizens to Preserve the East End. “Springs wants the town to protect the Springs gateway the way it did at the gateway to Wainscott,” referring to a purchase of open space recommended in a separate study that called for aesthetic improvements along Montauk Highway, among other efforts at traffic reducing and environmental protection. He said the group opposed any new development around the recycling center entrance.

“Traffic congestion we should strive to eliminate rather than accept as the inevitable result of development,” Frank Riina, a Springs resident, said. 

“Uncharted commercial development is an existential threat to the surrounding community,” he said. Intensifying the use of the sand mine would create an additional 1,000 or more additional vehicle trips per day, he said. 

For Jim Cafaro, who said he and his wife spend more than half of the year at their Clearwater Beach house, traffic on Springs-Fireplace Road reminded him of southern Westchester, where at certain times of day it was nearly impossible to get anywhere.

Several speakers expressed opposition to the range of service businesses there and to “truck farms,” typically fenced areas where landscape companies and others can store vehicles when they are not being used.

Robert Pine, a 29-year resident with a house on Springs-Fireplace Road was one of many speakers who urged the town board to buy remaining undeveloped parcels of land around the recycling center, particularly one for which a carwash is in the planning stage.

Springs is a paradox, as the authors of the study, Peter Flinker of Dodson and Flinker, a Massachusetts consulting firm, and Lisa Liquori of Fine Arts and Sciences, a former town planning director, remarked. In places it retains the character of a 19th-century farming and fishing community; in others it carries the burdens of growth, including water pollution, residential crowding, and quality of life hurdles.

Following a series of meetings in May with Springs residents and others, the consultants prepared interlocking plans for better bicycle routes, a walking “district” at the Head of Three Mile Harbor, and for the existing business area where Fort Pond Boulevard meets Springs-Fireplace Road.

A strong preservation message had come out of the meetings between residents and the consultants. Priorities that emerged from those sessions included maintaining what is left of the hamlet’s rural character and historical locations. On the environment, there was support for improving water quality in Three Mile Harbor and Accabonac Creek. Doing something about the near-total lack of sidewalks and making roads safer for bicyclists were top issues, as was limiting commercial work truck parking and large equipment storage in residential neighborhoods. 

Several speakers last Thursday called for a master plan for the area bounded to the east by Accabonac Road and on the west by Three Mile Harbor Road. Tina Plessett was among those and said that a new committee be convened to take it on.

Martin Drew lamented that the Springs Park, a 40-acre town parcel accessed via a long driveway off Three Mile Harbor Road, had become a dog run while the board ignores the need for active recreation spots in the hamlet.

According to the Census Bureau’s 2014 American Community Survey, Springs has the highest population density of all of the town’s hamlets. About 5,800 people were said to live in Springs in 2014, up by a third since 2000. It had the youngest population, with a median age of 38.5, was about a third Spanish-speaking or Latino, and had a median household income in 2014 of $80,303.

Environmentally, Springs faces a number of challenges, the study’s authors wrote. These included habitat loss, water and light pollution, and the impacts of climate change. “As sea level rises, coastal erosion will likely change the shape of beaches and coastal wetlands. Storm surges from coastal storms and hurricanes, on top of these higher tide elevations, will create flood impacts that extend further inland than the same sized storms today,” they wrote.

The authors called strongly for more preservation fund purchases to help address critical environmental and quality of life issues. Bike and foot traffic might be accommodated with new multipurpose trails parallel with some of the main roads and marking bike lanes elsewhere.

Businesses at either end of Fort Pond Boulevard would eventually meet improved design standards and be reconfigured so customers’ vehicles did not have to back out into traffic, perhaps made possible by a new shared parking ordinance. The eastern end, nearest to the Pollock-Krasner House and Study Center, could be rethought to allow outdoor seating, benches, and walking access between properties so that it became part of a “public realm,” encouraging social interaction or even a place to sit for a while and watch the world go by — property owners would be nudged in this direction through a new business overlay district with its own rules and standards.

The report also called for more frequent service on the Suffolk Transit 10B bus loop, which now spaces service at untenable 90-minute intervals.

During the May forums and smaller meetings, participants agreed on the need for better pedestrian and bike safety, but were divided about how to go about this, the study authors said.

Ms. Liquori, the co-consultant for all the hamlet studies, took copious notes throughout the hearing. At some point, the work will be declared complete and its recommendations incorporated into the town’s 2005 comprehensive plan, with possible code changes to come.

The final hamlet study hearing will be the one for Montauk on Dec. 6 at Town Hall.

Officials of the East Hampton Town Republican Committee are calling for the resignation of Amos Goodman, its chairman, in the wake of an investigation by the Public Integrity Bureau of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office. 

The investigation is focused on the validity of nominating petitions submitted by Mr. Goodman for the Republican Party’s candidate in the special election for the town board seat to which David Lys was appointed in January, and follows allegations of fraudulent signatures by the chairwoman of the East Hampton Independence Party, against whom Mr. Goodman previously leveled the same accusation. Mr. Lys won the Nov. 6 election in a landslide, winning 69 percent of the vote to the 31 percent won by his Republican opponent, Manny Vilar.

“We sent a letter this morning to Amos requesting his resignation,” Kyle Ballou, the committee’s secretary, said on Tuesday. The letter, he said, was signed by himself along with Michael Jordan, the committee’s vice chairman, and Rich Gherardi, the treasurer. “We’ll be actively seeking a new chairman as soon as he agrees and resigns.” 

Mr. Goodman, who succeeded Reg Cornelia as chairman in February, said on Tuesday that he had no direct knowledge of an investigation and had only heard rumors of one. He has not been contacted by the district attorney’s office, he said. “I certainly welcome scrutiny and will cooperate any way I can.” He also said he was unaware of a call for his resignation from the committee’s chairmanship. 

The Public Integrity Bureau does not disclose information pertaining to its investigations, an official there said on Monday. But Mr. Ballou said that day that the bureau “is going around investigating all of Amos Goodman’s petitions.” Investigators had been to his house, he said, and those of others on the committee. “Basically, they’ve contacted everyone who signed those petitions to verify that it was our signature.” 

“I’ll speak for the committee,” Mr. Ballou said. “We’re not aware of any impropriety by Mr. Goodman. We certainly don’t condone it or endorse it in any way, shape, or form.” Mr. Vilar, he said, “obviously wasn’t aware of any of this.” 

“We hope that it’s not true,” Mr. Ballou said of allegations of fraudulent nominating petitions. “But at this point, Amos has really done the party no favors. He did Mr. Vilar no favors. He came in with all these promises and really hasn’t delivered on anything except for really large legal bills, and it’s time for him to go.” 

Mr. Vilar said on Tuesday that it would be inappropriate for him to comment on an investigation. “Personally, we would only hope that anybody acting on my behalf clearly abides by the law and rules of good governance,” he said. “I wouldn’t want it any other way, nor would I tolerate it.” 

The investigation followed repeated complaints by Elaine Jones, the Independence Party’s chairwoman, that the Republicans’ nominating petitions were riddled with fraudulent signatures. Though she did not meet a July 16 deadline to register a complaint with the Suffolk County Board of Elections, she was adamant about alerting the district attorney, telling The Star in August that, “All I know is that Amos Goodman has forged signatures, and I’m going to the D.A. I’m going to get affidavits from the people who said they didn’t sign Manny’s petitions, and go to the D.A.” 

Mr. Goodman, who vigorously denied Ms. Jones’s accusation, had previously leveled the same charge at the Independence Party, filing a challenge to its nominating petitions for David Gruber  with the board of elections. Its petitions included forged signatures and the name of a deceased person, the Republicans claimed in seeking to invalidate them. “We’re going to go to court to get him bounced,” Mr. Goodman told The Star in July, speaking of Mr. Gruber’s appearance on the Independence Party line on the Nov. 6 ballot.

That challenge, in turn, came in the wake of Republicans’ effort to force a primary challenge by Mr. Vilar for the Independence Party’s nomination.

The Republicans’ challenge was successful. Several signatures on the Independence Party’s petitions were invalidated, and Mr. Gruber, who lost a Democratic Party primary challenge to Mr. Lys in September, did not appear on the Independence Party’s ballot in the Nov. 6 election.  

Mr. Goodman runs a corporate advisory firm focused on the aerospace and defense industries. He assumed chairmanship of the Republican committee after a disappointing 2017 campaign, in which Mr. Vilar was defeated in his bid for supervisor, its two candidates for town board lost by similarly wide margins, and just two of its nine candidates for town trustee won election. He pledged to lead an aggressive and sustained strategy to revitalize the party, hold elected officials accountable, and provide voters and taxpayers with alternatives to what a press release at the time described as “the increasingly rudderless single-party control of the town.” All five members of the town board are Democrats. 

On Tuesday, he appeared to distance himself from the Republican Committee. “If there are folks who think they can do it differently, that’s fine,” he said of leading the party. “If I’m not the right person to do it, so be it. I’m thinking about that myself. If people are wanting a change, that’s fine. I’m not aware of that in any concrete terms, and not clinging to something for the sake of clinging to it.”

He had assumed the chairmanship with reservations, he said, and cited lost professional opportunities as a consequence. “It was something people wanted me to do, and I thought there was a path to doing things differently that would have different results.” Chairmanship of the committee “is not without its sacrifices.” 

“I’ve always said that there were two things that I considered necessary for me to want to be involved and want to be leading the party,” he said. “A credible path to electoral victory” for Republicans in East Hampton was one, he said, and in light of this month’s election result, “the honest answer is I don’t know.” The second is, “Am I the person who can deliver that?” The first question is structural, he said, referring to the Republicans’ “registration deficit” and “the trend of ever-more out-of-town voters” registering in East Hampton. “The second is the personality piece. Am I the right person to maximize changes? The honest answer to both is I don’t know.” 

Intraparty infighting was a theme in East Hampton politics in 2018. A split among the East Hampton Democratic Committee burst into public view earlier this year when the party’s effort to elect a new leader was marked by accusations that officials had manipulated the process. Mr. Lys’s appointment, shortly after he changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democratic, also angered many members of the committee. 

Mr. Gruber led a splinter group called the East Hampton Reform Democrats, which he called a caucus within the Democratic Party and which fielded its own slate of candidates for the Democratic committee, along with his own candidacy for town board. He continues regular criticism of party officials, including Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc and Councilwomen Sylvia Overby and Kathee Burke-Gonzalez. 

During his campaign and again on Tuesday, Mr. Vilar asked for civil discourse. “I prided myself on a campaign that remained above the fray,” he said. “We need to bring politics back to the local level. It should be more like East Hampton than national. The public discourse and partisanship, it’s not good for society, for the community, for people.”

The South Fork Wind Farm, initially proposed as a 90-megawatt installation located approximately 35 miles off Montauk, is now expected to deliver up to 130 megawatts because of more advanced turbines than those originally planned for, according to officials of Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind, the Rhode Island company known as Deepwater Wind until its acquisition, completed this month, by the Danish energy company Orsted. 

A wind farm producing 130 megawatts could power around 70,000 Long Island residences, Clint Plummer, Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind’s head of market strategies and new projects, said on Tuesday. 

“Advances in the turbine technology mean the South Fork Wind Farm will use larger and more efficient turbines than initially envisioned,” Mr. Plummer told The Star in an email earlier this month. The initial proposal for the 15-turbine installation, made in 2015, was based on 6-megawatt turbines, he said, whereas 8, 10, and 12-megawatt turbines have since become available. 

The company has yet to select a turbine vendor, Mr. Plummer said, but included a range of sizes in the construction and operations plan it submitted to the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management in June, “to ensure we will have the opportunity to implement the best available technology.” 

On Tuesday, he said, “All of the science, engineering, and environmental analysis has taken this into account” in the company’s applications submitted to federal, state, and local permitting authorities. “We’re now pleased that B.O.E.M. and the New York State Public Service Commission are going through their reviews and taking public input.”

Before its acquisition by Orsted, Deepwater Wind, which built and operates the five-turbine Block Island Wind Farm, the nation’s first offshore wind farm, submitted an interconnection request to the New York Independent System Operator to assess the receiving capacity of the Long Island Power Authority substation off Cove Hollow Road in East Hampton, where the proposed wind farm would connect with the grid, Mr. Plummer said. “The resulting interconnection studies show that the substation can accommodate a maximum of approximately 130 megawatts, or approximately 40 megawatts more than the 90 megawatts already under contract with LIPA,” he said. 

“The footprint will not change,” David Gaier, PSEG Long Island’s director of communications, said of the South Fork Wind Farm. (PSEG Long Island manages the electrical grid on LIPA’s behalf.) “Nothing will really change as far as the viewscape.” The turbines, he said, will be “so far out in the ocean that they still won’t be visible” from the shore. 

LIPA will purchase all of the electricity produced by the wind farm, its board of directors having voted last week to accept a deal Orsted negotiated with PSEG Long Island to purchase the additional electricity, Mr. Plummer said on Tuesday. The additional power, he said, would be priced lower than the original 90-megawatt capacity. “In the case of this incremental capacity, the addition of up to 40 megawatts will be purchased by LIPA at a rate that is significantly less than the original contract.” 

“We’re in the middle of the process,” Mr. Plummer said, “but remain on schedule to have the South Fork Wind Farm in service by the end of 2022.”

New York State

D.E.C. Commissioner to Step Down

Basil Seggos, the commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, has announced that he will step down from that post. Mr. Seggos has not set a date for his departure but issued a statement confirming the move. 

“After nearly seven years of serving New Yorkers and implementing Governor Cuomo’s steadfast commitment to the environment, I made the difficult decision to leave the best job I’ve ever had,” he said. “I’m proud that we have re-established the state’s national leadership on environmental issues — and it couldn’t come at a better time, as we face an unprecedented attempt at the federal level to undermine our efforts to stave off climate change and safeguard clean air and water for future generations.” Mr. Seggos said that he would remain in his post into 2019.

His statement touted accomplishments including increasing and sustaining the state’s Environmental Protection Fund at $300 million for the last three years, finalizing the largest forest preserve addition in Adirondack Park’s history with the Boreas Ponds acquisition, shepherding the governor’s $65 million initiative to reduce the frequency of harmful algal blooms, advancing the $2.5 billion Clean Water Infrastructure Act and investing hundreds of millions of dollars to improve the state’s water infrastructure, action to investigate and clean up certain unregulated contaminants, and encouraging sustainable and responsible outdoor recreation.

- C.W.

Southampton Town

Opposing the T. J. Maxx Expansion

Several members of the Bridgehampton Citizens Advisory Committee, including Pamela Harwood, the chairwoman, spoke in opposition to a proposed 17,000-square-foot expansion of the T.J. Maxx store at Bridgehampton Commons at a Southampton Town Planning Board public hearing last Thursday. 

Ms. Harwood questioned the board’s finding that the expansion would have no negative environmental effect and would not lead to an increase in traffic. She said that none of Bridgehampton’s residents wanted the hamlet to become a destination for big box stores. “I love Bridgehampton Commons, and I love T.J. Maxx, but enough is enough,” she said. 

Since a representative of Kimco Realty, which owns the shopping center, was not present at the meeting, the hearing was held open and will reconvene on Dec. 13.

- J.B.

The East Hampton Town Board is expected to adopt the town’s 2019 budget at its meeting tonight, which will also include a public hearing on the hamlet study focusing on Springs.

Len Bernard, the town’s budget officer, told the board at its Nov. 1 meeting that the state comptroller had found all revenue and expense projections in the $80.7 million budget to be reasonable. By law, the budget must be adopted by Nov. 20.

The preliminary budget represents a 3.8-percent increase over last year’s spending, though 25 percent of that increase goes to the fund for East Hampton Airport, to purchase aviation fuel. That expense is more than offset by revenue from selling the fuel to airport operators. “If you take out the airport, which is self-funding and does not levy a tax, that increase goes down by almost 1 percent, to 2.8,” Mr. Bernard told the board. 

Tax rates increase by 2.33 percent outside the incorporated village and 3.3 percent within it. 

Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc will receive a salary of $111,265 in 2019. His colleagues on the board will each be paid $69,541. The town justices’ salary is $80,806, and the town clerk and superintendent of highways will each be compensated at $93,793. The chair of assessors’ salary will be $89,250, and the two town assessors will each be paid $80,591. The clerk of the town trustees’ salary will be $23,201, the two deputy clerks will each be paid $18,934, and the other six trustees will each be paid $8,060. 

Before closing the hearing, the board voted to add $5,000 to a grant to the East End Special Players, a theater group for the developmentally disabled. “As a result, all the rates will change, microscopically,” Mr. Bernard said. “That will be what we put up for adoption.” 

“I think we’re in very sound financial position,” Mr. Van Scoyoc said at the Nov. 1 meeting. “We are maintaining our AAA rating with Moody’s, which is probably a very strong indicator that we’re in good shape. It’s no surprise the state would follow through by giving thumbs-up approval.”

The public hearing for the Springs hamlet study will be the fourth of five on the studies. Public comment on the studies focusing on Wainscott and Amagansett was largely positive, but the East Hampton study’s hearing saw several Springs residents voicing worry that development and redevelopment on either side of Springs-Fireplace Road would overwhelm the already well-traveled corridors to their hamlet. 

Overall goals of the Springs study, to be incorporated into the comprehensive plan if approved, are to preserve and enhance the hamlet’s scenic, rural, and historical character; improve water quality and reduce pollution loading to its harbors; improve safety and connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists; provide alternative parking options for home-based contractor businesses, and protect and enhance the walkability, cohesiveness, attractiveness, and functionality of the head of Three Mile Harbor and the east end of Fort Pond Boulevard. 

Tonight’s meeting is at 6:30 at Town Hall.

Five months after the Journey East Hampton hotel opened on Pantigo Road, its owner is seeking permission from the East Hampton Town Planning Board to install a bar on the premises, contending that it will be used strictly by guests and not the general public. The application for a site plan modification, presented at the board’s Nov. 7 meeting, was met with skepticism by members including Job Potter, the board’s chairman, who said that the owner, Bridgeton Holdings, a Manhattan real estate development company, seemed to be surreptitiously trying to create a bar scene at the hotel. 

Marguerite Wolffsohn, the town’s planning director, presented the details of the application as well as the parameters of the “on-premises” liquor license the owner received from the State Liquor Authority. Ms. Wolffsohn said that Bridgeton Holdings, which intends to install a pool with a deck at the hotel, is seeking permission to use a pool house-type structure as a cafe and bar area; to provide 24 tables and a total of 63 seats (including seating around the pool), and to serve alcohol outdoors. There would also be music and dancing in this recreational area.  

“I’m having serious feelings of Hero Beach part two,” said Mr. Potter, referring to the Hero Beach Club, a Montauk resort owned by Jonathan Krasner and other investors, who are seeking to add a restaurant and bar to the premises despite objections from neighbors who fear the resurrection of a boisterous party scene in the hamlet. 

Representing Bridgeton Holdings at the meeting was Laurie Wiltshire, the president of Land Planning Services, a company that helps property owners navigate permit applications. She rejected the comparison between Journey East Hampton and Hero Beach Club, and said that the mission of Bridgeton Holdings was to provide a peaceful place to stay for families and couples. “My clients are not looking for a party that will chase away the clients they’re trying to attract,” she said. 

Mr. Potter asked Ms. Wiltshire if Journey East Hampton and Hero Beach Club were owned by the same people. She replied, “Absolutely not.” 

However, the connections between Bridgeton Holdings — which recently purchased the Atlantic Terrace hotel in Montauk — and Hero Beach Club are numerous. Bridgeton Holdings manages the day-to-day operations at Hero Beach Club and, according to a representative from the development company, also owns equity in the Montauk hotel. The liquor license that Hero Beach Club applied for last year lists Atit Jariwala, the Bridgeton Holdings C.E.O., as one of the hotel’s principals. 

Mr. Potter questioned why Bridgeton Holdings, in its previous site plan discussions with the department, had not divulged an intent to install a bar, or revealed that it had applied for a liquor license back in April. Ms. Wiltshire replied that she was unaware of such plans. “The only reason they applied for a liquor license is because they intend to have mass-gathering permits for weddings one to four times a season,” she said.

Ms. Wiltshire said that a five-foot-long bar, which has already been installed at Journey East Hampton, was currently being used as a counter for serving breakfast and for providing a drink to guests upon arrival. 

If a full-service bar were approved, Mr. Potter wondered, “What would prevent the public from coming in and buying a drink and having it on the property?” Ms. Wiltshire said the hotel would not allow it, because it would detract from its mission, and she argued that the relatively small size of the hotel’s lot and the lack of a view make it an uninviting destination for the general public.  

Ed Krug, a board member, wasn’t convinced by that reasoning. “Who would have thought the Memory Motel, frankly, would have been a place to hang out,” he said, referring to the popularity of the historic dive bar in Montauk.

Although the Journey East Hampton owner was seeking a site plan modification to include the bar, the board said that, instead, a special permit would be necessary. Town code allows a bar as an accessory to a resort on the following conditions: if the use is compatible with the neighborhood, if there is adequate parking, if there are appropriate setbacks from adjoining residences, and if the hotel has a minimum of 25 guest rooms. 

Ian Calder-Piedmonte, a board member, pointed out that Journey East Hampton contains exactly 25 units, three of which were added by the new owners. “Somebody seems to have known,” he said, implying that the owners were aware of the special permit provisions and had long planned to install a bar. 

Eric Bregman, a lawyer for the applicant, said that in order to alleviate the board’s concern about the hotel becoming a gathering spot, the owner would be willing to sign a covenant that stated that the property was not permitted to be a “general party venue” other than on those days when special-event permits had been issued. The covenant, he said, would apply to the current owner and any future owner. He suggested that he and John Jilnicki, the board’s attorney, convene to work out the language of the covenant and then return to the board at a later date.

Access to the easternmost point in New York State, at least close to sea level, will be curtailed for two years beginning in May for a project to shore up the bluff under the Montauk Lighthouse. 

Earlier estimates for the $24 million undertaking were that it would take 18 months to complete.

The work is to involve the complete reconstruction of an 840-foot-long boulder revetment that now wraps around the Point but is considered to be failing. Much of the existing stone would be reused in a design that would extend about 40 feet farther seaward, at a more gentle angle, to better diminish wave impacts.

The public will be prevented from entering the area from Turtle Cove around the Point, all the way to a surfcasting spot known to aficionados as Scott’s. Footpaths will allow surfers, anglers, and others to access the cobble beach to the west and on the north side.

Those with something to say about the project would need to weigh in soon, however; written comments are due at the New York Department of Environmental Conservation office in Stony Brook by Nov. 28, ahead of a fast-track schedule to final approvals.

During a meeting at the Montauk Firehouse on Tuesday evening that was not broadly promoted on the East End, Frank Verga of the United States Army Corps of Engineers said that he expected the required State Conservation Department permit would be issued by Dec. 18 and bidding from contractors sought soon after that. Construction could begin in May.

Montauk, and particularly the area surrounding the Point, is beloved among surfcasters. In online fishing forums, some dare not speak its name, referring to it only as “M” or, in some instances, Mecca.

“There isn’t a day that goes by in fishing season that somebody doesn't call and ask, ‘Hey, what’s going on at the Point?’ ” Harvey Bennett, the owner of the Tackle Shop in Amagansett, said yesterday. 

Anglers from all over the United States and overseas come to target striped bass there. “They come here to fish the Point. That’s it,” Mr. Bennett said. “It is much bigger than people realize.”

In the long run, it was an open question in Mr. Bennett’s mind whether the new and improved revetment would affect the fishing there. “It's a proven fact hat you can catch big bass off the Point in July,” he said. Whether that would change once the work is completed was unknowable, in his opinion.

The portion of the existing revetment, or sea wall, that has been described by the Army Corps of Engineers as inadequate is about two thirds of the total length of the stone fortifications there. Over the years, Greg Donohue and the Montauk Historical Society, which owns the property, have extended the rock bulwark to about 1,300 feet in length, including a stone viewpoint and seating area to the south of the lighthouse, which will remain.

In the Army Corps of Engineers redesign of the critical forward-facing section, new stone blocks of about 30,000 pounds apiece would be placed on top of a layer of smaller material. Surrounding that, a sloping “apron” would extend downward and be partially buried in the seabed.

The work would be conducted in sequence, beginning with a 20-foot-wide flat “bench,” or road-like platform, about 10 feet above sea level, from which heavy equipment would install the stone apron. The bench would remain once construction was done and a second would be built about 10 feet higher than that, giving the revetment a step-like profile to better protect the bluff, Mr. Verga said. Without it, the corps and historical society believe, the lighthouse would eventually tumble into the sea.

For Eugene Alper of East Hampton, one of the few members of the public at Tuesday's meeting, the lower of the stone benches on the new revetment was a safety concern. Because visitors to the Point would be tempted to walk out on it, he suggested, there was an increased risk that someone could be swept off by a wave. “You're putting this much farther out into the ocean,” he said.

“Sensible fishermen are not going to go out there,” Mr. Donohue said.

“I’ve seen out-of-town fishermen there and I saw them get knocked on their asses by a wave,” Mr. Alper answered.

Mr. Verga said that any insurance claims or lawsuit awards would be the responsibility of the Montauk Historical Society.

The contractor would be allowed to work seven days a week, around the clock.

If possible, a 150-ton concrete observation bunker now on the beach in Turtle Cove would be saved and reinstalled elsewhere on the lighthouse property, Mr. Donohue said on Tuesday. “That's the dream, anyway,” he said.

The waters around the Point are popular with surfers, too. The break that, potentially, would be most directly affected would be the one known as Alamo, which is surfable during larger swells. The Army Corps of Engineers has said that its computer model of the project showed that the sea wall would have no impact in what it determined to be the “takeoff zone,” about 450 feet offshore. However, depending on the swell direction, surfers often drop in on a fast, left-hand peak much closer to the shore than that.

The plan has been formally in the works since a conceptual approval in 2005, the Army Corps of Engineers representative, Mr. Verga, said on Tuesday. Public comments were solicited the following year and in 2017.

Partial funding came from a 2013 Congressional appropriation in the wake of Hurricane Sandy; the federal government will pay for 65 percent of the construction, and the state the remainder. The Montauk Historical Society will be responsible for maintenance and replacing the sea wall if it comes to that; its share has been estimated at about $59,000 annually.

The historical society took over the property from the Coast Guard in 1996. It is now a national landmark.

The Army Corps of Engineers considered other options for safeguarding the lighthouse, including moving it back from the edge and dumping sand to the seaward side, but concluded that an expanded stone sea wall was the best choice.

Stone and other construction materials will be trucked to the Point and delivered to the site from both the Turtle Cove and northern access roads. Mr. Verga said that every effort would be made to schedule the deliveries at low-traffic times of day, avoiding holidays and special events.

Though the project is on track for a December final approval, Sue McCormick, the chief of the D.E.C. Coastal Erosion Management Program, said that if her department received enough substantive comments by the Nov. 28 deadline, it could potentially withhold the final sign-off until the concerns had been addressed by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Under that scenario, the December timeline might not work, she said.

Written comments can be mailed to Kevin A. Kispert, NYSDEC, SUNY Stony Brook, 50 Circle Road, Stony Brook, 11790-3409.

As East Hampton Town moves rapidly toward code changes that would make it more difficult for hotels to add bars and restaurants, at least one town councilman is suggesting that the proposal, which could be voted on as early as tonight, does not go far enough. Since an Oct. 11 hearing on the code change, the town board has received many messages of support and pleas for it to do more. On the other hand, some owners of resort properties, as well as the Montauk Chamber of Commerce, have expressed alarm. 

Responding to years of complaints about hotels and modest restaurants drawing crowds far in excess of their overnight guest capacity, particularly in Montauk, town attorneys began drafting new rules earlier this year. The amendments proposed would ask some hotel owners looking to expand to provide parking spaces on their own property commensurate with their current capacity and for half of their expected occupancy, whether indoors or out.

Though some of East Hampton Town’s hotels and motels are on land zoned for resorts, a considerable number are not, having been established prior to zoning regulation. Some of these businesses fall into a legal gray zone in which, technically, they are not supposed to grow, but in practice have found plenty of wiggle room within the town code; others are zoned correctly, but have created problems nonetheless.

Estimates vary about how many places that now offer accommodations one night at a time would be affected. A town-commissioned study said the total was fewer than 30; members of the town business advisory concluded that the number was as high as 65, East Hampton Town Councilwoman Sylvia Overby said during a board meeting in Montauk on Tuesday.

The new rules would allow hotels and clubs to have a small area set aside for items guests use, such as toiletries, as well as “signature or logo” items such as hats, T-shirts, or coffee mugs. The tougher parking requirement were intended to limit additional dangers to drivers and pedestrians or anything that would “otherwise negatively impact town highways and the community as a whole” if a bar, tavern, or restaurant was added.

The amendments would also limit the size of any additional services, whether indoors or out, to no more than a third of the existing operations’ functional square footage. At present, some former motels, such as the Montauk Beach House, Surf Lodge, and Ruschmeyer’s Inn in Montauk, have devoted large swaths of their grounds to outdoor concerts, D.J.s, and general revelry.

Paul Monte, whose family at one time owned Gurney’s Inn, worried in an email to Montauk Chamber of Commerce members that the change could “become a slippery slope resulting in the loss of significant grandfathered rights from all types of businesses and a great loss in commercial properties’ value.”

Now under corporate ownership, Gurney’s Montauk Resort and Spa, has opened a club on what it calls “our 2,000-foot private beach” with hundreds of beach chairs and umbrellas and 16 king-sized daybeds, all available for daily rental, with bar and food service and live music, in front of its main building. Day charges are in the $750 range.

During the Tuesday meeting, Councilman Jeff Bragman said he was in favor of the parking proposal but he was not sure it would work as intended. Nevertheless, he said, “It’s a good start, better than doing nothing.” 

From his perspective, Mr. Bragman wondered if town law should be amended to strike new restaurants and bars from the list of what is allowed at hotels. “I don’t see them in any way a benefit to the community. It is worth considering taking a stronger stance,” he said. When the zoning code was adopted, that level of service was never intended, he said.

“There are lots of letters from residents saying don’t let them do it,” he said. “They’re scared. I don’t think Montauk needs any more of this.”

Councilwoman Sylvia Overby, who had brought up the proposed parking requirements at the meeting, responded. “This law was to make sure that you could accommodate people at your motel.” That, she said, was reasonable.

“This is not something that we should just ban, but we should be careful that the expansion should not hurt local businesses,” Town Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc said. He added that such amenities for overnight guests were desirable, but that the town needed to add a degree of control.

Ms. Overby took up Mr. Van Scoyoc’s observation about competition with existing eateries. “We need to also support local businesses by not spreading out with the more restaurants. We do need to consider the other businesses that are downtown as well. We should make sure that they can survive,” she said.

In Mr. Bragman’s view, the traditional, small motels in Montauk are a boon to restaurants nearby. “I don’t think we have an obligation to let these little motels change into something else. I think we might go a little further,” he said.

At this point Michael Sendlenski, the town attorney, spoke up to say it was not legally possible to limit a hotel’s bar or restaurants to people staying there. “I think that’s a danger,” Mr. Bragman said.

A potential loophole pointed out on Tuesday by Mr. Bragman was that the town planning board would be able to waive or reduce the strict parking calculations on a case-by-case basis.

Concerns have been heightened recently with reports that the Atlantic Terrace hotel had been sold and that the new Journey East Hampton hotel on Pantigo Road in East Hampton had obtained a State Liquor Authority license for an outdoor poolside bar for up to 200 patrons. Similar worries have circulated about the Hero Beach Club, which has been tangling with the town over its plans for a bar. A single investment company, Bridgeton Holdings, owns equity in all three establishments.

During the Oct. 11 hearing, Montauk residents had pressed the board to do something about summer noise, traffic, drugs, and fights that create a sense of chaos. The proposal would mean that businesses seeking to expand or add amenities would have to meet current parking requirements before getting approvals for anything new. A large quantity of letters and emails supporting the new limits poured into Town Hall subsequently.

“I want to tell Montauk, ‘We’re listening to you,’ ” Mr. Bragman said.

Orsted, Denmark's largest energy company and the world's largest offshore wind developer, has completed the acquisition of Deepwater Wind from the D.E. Shaw Group. The $510 million transaction was announced last month.

As a combined organization, Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind becomes the leading American offshore wind platform, with a goal of delivering renewable energy to the eight states on the East Coast from Massachusetts to Virginia that have committed to a combined 10 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030.

The acquisition comes as Deepwater Wind's proposed South Fork Wind Farm, to be constructed approximately 35 miles from Montauk, is undergoing review by federal and state agencies, and the East Hampton Town Board and trustees ponder whether to grant easements or leases allowing the 15-turbine wind farm's transmission cable to make landfall at the ocean beach at the end of Beach Lane in Wainscott, the company's preferred site. From there it would be buried along a route to the Long Island Power Authority substation near Cove Hollow Road in East Hampton.

The federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management held a public scoping session in Amagansett on Monday, at which members of the public asked questions and made comments. The wind farm is opposed by commercial fishermen who have raised multiple concerns about its impact on navigability, fish migration patterns, and the electromagnetic field emanating from the transmission cable. Others have expressed concern about the wind farm's impact on whales and other marine life, as well as birds and bats. Questions have also been raised about the wind farm's effect on electricity rates paid by LIPA's customers.

Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind will be based in Boston and Providence, R.I. The company will begin integration over the coming weeks and months. Its Amagansett office will remain, as will all of its staff on the South Fork, Jeffrey Grybowski, co-chief executive of the newly renamed company, told The Star last month.

"We have created a world-class team, with both deep experience building large-scale offshore wind projects and intimate knowledge of the U.S. markets," Thomas Brostrom, Orsted U.S. Offshore Wind's chief executive officer, said in a statement issued on Thursday. "The approval of this deal signals the importance of growing the U.S. offshore wind industry. We are moving quickly to integrate the two U.S. organizations so we can deliver large-scale clean energy projects as soon as possible. We look forward to continuing Deepwater Wind's first-class work along the Eastern Seaboard and taking the U.S. market to the next level."

"It is very exciting for two pioneering companies to join forces to create the clear leader in the U.S. offshore wind market," Mr. Grybowski said in a statement. "Our teams will now begin to merge together to advance our existing projects and to prepare for our next round of projects for the East Coast. We have very big plans for the U.S."