Many thanks to the more than 70 people who attended the March 20th MICA meeting. The lengthy discussion, mostly civil but at times understandably heated, about the proposed reception area addition and parking improvements at Surge Rehabilitation and Quantum Rehabilitation was important and productive. Neighborhood residents clearly needed to vent, and part of MICA’S mission is providing the opportunity to do so. More importantly, owners and reps for the incongruously situated nursing homes listened…and have already begun responding with solutions suggested by area residents at the meeting. Lighting alternatives are being sought and the diesel generator is being tested. Staff began picking up litter the very next morning and has committed to doing so regularly. Alternative parking arrangements are slated to start April 1st, with some staff shuttled from parking lots on MCR. Additional lots are being negotiated. These are initial steps in the long needed effort to demonstrate responsibility and regain the community’s trust. MICA will continue to monitor these efforts as well as the project application, which has not yet been filed with the Town of Brookhaven. The town also needs to help Oakcrest Ave neighbors with additional parking restrictions along the length of this narrow, residential town road on the historic Benjamin Tallmadge Trail. The Pine Lake parking lot needs repairing, too. Photos have been forwarded to Parks Commissioner Ed Morris who will address this.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1DkES3rgfR/
Link directly above is video taken on Thursday, March 20, 2025 around 2pm.
MICA received the revised site plan up top on 1/6/25. Representatives for the Surge/Quantum Oakcrest Proposal will attend the March 20, 2025 MICA meeting.
Project attorney Keith Brown explains:
“Our project manager, Christopher C. Voorhis, of the engineering firm Nelson & Pope conducted a site visit and aerial photography analysis of the Property. The site visit and aerial photography showed that there are actually 119 existing on-site parking stalls, which is an increase of 9 stall on top of the 110 on-site stalls that were previously calculated when we first spoke last year.
“This in turn reduces the total net increase that will result from the proposed redevelopment of the Property. As noted below, the project engineer found that it is not feasible to add an additional 55 stalls based on existing site conditions. However, the proposed net increase of 48 stalls will improve existing conditions at the property and to the surrounding area.
“The project engineer designed the site to optimize parking as much as possible. We considered adding stalls in the front yard directly adjacent to Oak Crest Avenue. However, doing so it not feasible due to the presence of an existing sanitary leaching field because stormwater runoff will not be able to be managed before running off site because of separations needed to these sanitary leaching structures.
“Ultimately, the proposed parking improvements provide a total of 167 parking spaces instead of the 165 parking spaces requested. The breakdown is as follows:
Old Plan
Existing 110
Request to add 55
Total 165
New Plan
Existing 119
Proposed 48
Total 167″
MICA Statement for March 20, 2025 meeting: “This location is a problem. It’s in a country setting, a rural neighborhood on the historic Tallmadge Trail, across from a glacial kettle hole lake. Business is apparently booming – making parking nearly impossible for staff, visitors and especially residents, who regularly have their driveways blocked and mail delivery denied because of the additional cars on Oakcrest Ave. Safe driving, walking, school bus transport, garbage pickup — all have been compromised by the haphazard parking . There are also environmental concerns, regarding decreased natural buffers, storm water retention, and runoff into Pine Lake. Litter is rampant, lighting is obtrusive, smells and sights are not properly screened or prevented. Solutions are absolutely needed.
The neighbors also need help with parking on Oakcrest from the TOB. The options given are confusing. People deserve assistance from their govt when faced with an overwhelming commercial enterprise improperly sited in their neighborhood. Though none of us was responsible for it at its inception, we are all obligated to reach the safest compromise possible.”
From March 2024: The owners of the dual nursing home-rehab facilities at 49 & 63 Oakcrest Avenue want to add a building and improve the parking areas. The proposed building measures 3,350 square feet and would be slotted in behind the existing Surge location. The rear parking lot would be reconfigured, with about the same number of stalls. The northern parking area in front of Surge will also be revamped and expanded a bit. Three new parking spots will be added and some existing spots made more accessible near the Quantum building.
MICA recognizes the incongruous location of this site in a quaint, residential lakeside area. Parking has long been a problem, with staff often needing to park at the small Brookhaven Town lot at Pine Lake, and cars sometimes blocking driveways on Oakcrest Avenue.
It’s very important to us that these proposed changes are effectively communicated to the public.
This happened at the regular monthly meeting of the Middle Island Civic Association on Thursday, March 21, 2024 at 7pm at Longwood Public Library. Members and local residents took advantage of the opportunity to have the project explained to them by professional experts, to make inquiries, and provide recommendations and comments. This has been MICA’s tradition for decades, one that the Town of Brookhaven also values in its decision making process.
MICA always provides our presenters with a list of topics and potential questions. For “Oakcrest” these are:
- What will the new building be used for? It’s not that big, but will it be adding patients and beds?
- How was the current parking number determined? The plan says 110 existing. But if you visit the lots and count the cars, there are more like 130 cars on site (albeit some parked illegally.) The concern here is that the net parking increase, listed at 55, isn’t realistic given how the site is actually being used. The formula is correct and fulfills the “required” needs, but the reality is somewhat different – it’s this reality of the parking that’s the most contentious aspect at the two facilities. This needs careful review at the meeting.
- What variances are needed?
- What sort of construction time line is anticipated?
- Where will people park during construction? (Important. given that parking is already a nightmare…
- What kind of lighting will be in the rear parking lot? A 9/11 rescuer who lives adjacent to the rear lot and suffers from PTSD has complained about the existing lighting infiltrating his home..
- What fencing will be put in place? This is of special concern on the north side where the realigned front parking will come very close to homes.
- What sort of plantings will be added? (Hint: we love native plants here in Middle Island!)
- What’s the status of the sign upgrades? A few years back, MICA and neighbors objected to a ZBA application for larger interior-lighted signs at both buildings; the ZBA only allowed for downward, gooseneck lighting of a certain amperage, but no changes ever occurred.
O
