Hommocks Middle School may be getting a long sought expansion as revealed in a report presented at the Board of Education Study Session on Tuesday, June 6th. Hampshire Recreation, LLC., the company that operates Hampshire Country Club, which is the roughly 116 acre golf and tennis club that sits between Hommocks Middle School and the Orienta neighborhood in Mamaroneck, proposed a deal to gift a portion of land to the district as part of a plan to transform the country club property.
How did we get here?
Hampshire ownership has been pursuing multiple development options for the country club since they purchased it, in 2010. The possibility for a gift of land is part of their “Plan A,” which includes building 121 condominium units connected to the current clubhouse. In the plan, the golf space would be reconfigured but remain 18 holes, and Hampshire would promise that the remaining land be restricted for recreational use in perpetuity.
Hampshire has run into roadblocks. The clubhouse area of the country club sits in a Marine Recreation Zone, a type of zoning area near many local shores that strictly forbids residential development, ensuring our coastal areas remain recreational spaces like country clubs or boatyards. The plan for multi family condo buildings (Plan A) would require an unprecedented amendment to the zoning of the property granted by the Village, something it denied in 2014, aligning with community opposition that cited protecting the Marine Recreation Zone and environmental concerns, seeing as the area is partially reclaimed land that is prone to flooding. Community opponents believe that if the Village allows Hampshire to amend its zoning, the Marine Recreation Zone that surrounds other clubs could be at risk of development. An additional concern is adding to the population of crowded local schools.
What did Hampshire do next?
The Village’s refusal to amend the zoning led Hampshire to turn to “Plan B,” or building a mix of 105 single family and carriage homes across the golf course, reducing its current 18-hole size by half. Considering the topography of the golf course and that it is prone to flooding, “Plan B” would require extensive construction of elevated bases for the homes, something that requires approval from the Village Planning Board, a separate body from the Village of Mamaroneck, which had previously rejected the plan.
Relations failed to improve between Hampshire and the Planning Board, culminating in Hampshire filing a lawsuit against the Planning Board in 2022. The New York State Supreme Court decided that the Planning Board’s decision on “Plan B” was illegal because it was based on an existing desire for a negative result for Hampshire, and ordered that the planning board reconsider aspects of “Plan B.”
Why is Hampshire now interested in gifting land to the school district?
Even if the Planning Board were to approve “Plan B” (which is unlikely even though it is currently reconsidering aspects of the plan), critics of Hampshire have claimed that “Plan B” was never Hampshire’s true intention. Celia Felsher, a member of the Mamaroneck Coastal Environmental Coalition, argues in a letter to the Board of Education that “Plan B” is “being promoted by Hampshire to gain public support for its ideal luxury condo development.” Felsher believes that by making it seem like some sort of development is inevitable, Hampshire hopes to persuade community members to support “Plan A,” partly by offering a 10 acre gift to the district as a sweetener to push the plan forward. According to the “Memorandum of Understanding” (MOU) between the district and Hampshire presented at the school board study session on June 6th, a gift of land is of interest to Mamaroneck Schools in order to address evolving challenges regarding enrollment. Hampshire has declined The Globe’s request for a statement on the gift of land.
Why does the district need more space?
Superintendent Dr. Robert Shaps, speaking at the study session, said that he sees the potential land donation as an “opportunity” to address “enrollment challenges” as well as inadequate space needs across the district, specifically at the elementary schools and middle schools. School Board President Ariana Cohen, speaking to The Globe, emphasized the urgency of the issue, adding that “even if no other soul came to Hommocks, we can’t sit an entire 6th or 7th grade in the cafeteria.” At the June 13th discussion about the signing of the MOU, a Larchmont resident and parent of four children attending Mamaroneck Schools agreed with Cohen, mentioning how she has “huge concerns about space” and how “my kids…are not even allowed to wear backpacks [through the halls] for ‘safety’ reasons.” Cohen called current class size numbers “less [than] desirable” and “problematic,” mainly because the number of students is forcing the district to “make decisions by default,” meaning that they can’t prioritize class quality, sense of belonging, or other educational priorities, but instead are bound by ensuring every student has a seat in the classroom.
How will this new land address these challenges?
The MOU suggests that the land could be a location to construct a new building, build new field spaces or tennis courts, and improve parking and traffic flow surrounding Hommocks, possibly by moving Hommocks Road. While decisions about how the space might be used won’t be up to the current board, Cohen says that the land would allow future boards the flexibility “to make decisions…about adding another gym, [or] building onto the cafeteria,” and how “for once, [the district] wouldn’t always be dependent on municipalities” for our fields, tennis courts, and other key spaces. As for concerns that the development itself would bring overcrowding, the MOU states that Hampshire will include “age restricted units to reduce any adverse impact on the schools,” although the extent to which these restrictions will be imposed remains a question.
Is the offer changing the minds of Village of Mamaroneck leaders?
During the June 6th board of education meeting, Shaps recognized that “there are a lot of things that [this plan is] contingent upon…[including] the ongoing discussion and pursuit [between] the developers and the Village of Mamaroneck.” Hampshire has already lost a separate lawsuit against the Village of Mamaroneck after the Village initially rejected “Plan A,” and according to an email obtained by The Globe from Village of Mamaroneck Mayor Tom Murphy to Mamaroneck residents on June 6th, a continued pursuit of “Plan A” may be fruitless. Murphy called the donation a “Trojan horse,” which will “pit one segment of our community against another for the sole purpose of enriching a developer.” He added on his Facebook page that “the Village of Mamaroneck Board of Trustees has NO appetite for considering a rezoning of this property,” reiterating that any sort of change to Hampshire’s zoning, which would be required by “Plan A,” would “gut the Village’s Marine Recreation Zone,” something Murphy called “vital in keeping Mamaroneck a residential seaside community.” Murphy has not responded to The Globe’s request for comment.
What does the district agree to should they sign the MOU? Does signing the MOU mean the district must advocate for Hampshire?
Cohen assures the community that the MOU “will truly be just [an agreement]. We will not be advocating for what to develop” or helping the developers in any way. She added, however, that the developers at Hampshire “clearly have something that [they] want out of this too” and therefore may, as many community members speculate, “try to use this as leverage.”
Tom Scapoli, the Mamaroneck Schools District Council speaking at the initial meeting, said that the district intentionally drafted the MOU (which they did with Hampshire) with the only “obligation being to share factual information,” and that the MOU does not advocate for one side or the other.
The MOU does have contingencies, notably that transfer of the land is contingent on approval of all original stipulations in “Plan A,” meaning that any changes to the plan Hampshire created would void the land transfer. Critics see this condition as something that would make the district indirectly advocate for Hampshire. The MOU also expires after six months, and will only be automatically extended another six months if the Village of Mamaroneck agrees to amend Hampshire’s zoning, forcing the Village to work on a timeline that, based on the nature of the process, could be very difficult. Should the Village end up amending Hampshire’s zoning after the six month period, Hampshire would have no obligation to donate the land. Speaking of Hampshire’s interest in limiting the process to just six months, Murphy said that he “caution(s) [the district] to tread carefully. If someone has said that it has to be done right now, it is not a good deal.”
What about environmental concerns? Doesn’t Hampshire flood often?
Members of the board of education and community stakeholders have shared similar concerns about the project. The golf course is in a major floodplain and regularly has major issues with flooding during storms. At the June 13th Public Comment Meeting at Mamaroneck High School, some residents referred to Hampshire as a “bathtub” that will often take weeks to drain. Additionally, the golf course is surrounded by higher land on all sides, so if one part floods, the entire property does. This means that managing any water accumulation would have to be done in concert with Hampshire ownership, potentially presenting logistical challenges. The entire property is also built on reclaimed marshland, so building on much of the land would most likely be difficult and expensive. The 2020 Environmental Quality Review Act conducted by the Planning Board to survey Hampshire’s environmental viability also found levels of chemicals, including lead and arsenic, in subsurface soil samples. This could be due to use of pesticides since the club’s founding in the 1920s. While it is unclear what danger this poses, because of the potential soil contamination, the Review Act recommends that the land be covered with at least two feet of clean fill to create a safe and clean platform to build on, adding more cost to the project.
While Scapoli mentioned that “[the district] has the right to do [any environmental testing] under this MOU,” Cohen said that the district is not planning any in house testing before voting whether to sign the MOU on Wednesday, July 26th.
How might the board move forward?
On July 26th, the Board of Education Trustees will convene to vote on whether to sign the MOU. Cohen emphasized that the MOU is just a draft, and that the board is working with the district’s legal team to continue examining specific language and concerns brought up by community members, meaning the current draft will not be what is up for vote on July 26th. How the board will vote is currently unclear, but feedback from parents and community members is divided, and many parents with students in the district have expressed support to the district for signing the MOU. The Globe will continue to follow the situation as it develops and will provide continued coverage in the fall.
