Comprehensive Plan debate at Shelter Island Town Hall: Possible 12- to 18-month delay is voiced

“Pie in the sky.” That’s how Supervisor Amber Brach-Williams described her previous vision of how the Shelter Island Comprehensive Plan would be adopted by Sept. 30 in order to file for a grant due in 2025 to implement the plan for 2026.

It all blew up at Tuesday’s Town Board work session, not because the plan is dead, but over the issue of what kind of environmental assessment of the plan needs to be done.

For months, the majority of people following Comp Plan development have insisted a full environmental assessment of the plan must take place.

A municipality’s Comprehensive Plan dictates policy on multiple fronts, including development, land use, transportation and housing. In 1994, a Comprehensive Plan was adopted by a Town Board resolution. A seven-month effort of discussion and research in 2008 produced an update to that plan, but the Board rejected it.

In Tuesday’s discussion, consultants from BFJ Planning, who have been working with the Comp Plan Task Force and Advisory Committee (CPAC), outlined the distinctions between a short form and the much longer and more expensive environmental study, which seemed to provide the Town Board with reasons for declaring the plan could likely go with a short form under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA).

Frank Fish, a partner at BFJ, told the Town Board its first step is to complete a short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) that poses questions about the plan. In completing that form, Town Board members can quickly decide if they need further information before deciding whether they can conclude no further SEQRA study is needed or they can seek more information before making any decision.

The test for them is not just to decide if there are “significant” issues that require the much longer General Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) but whether those issues are “adverse” factors, Mr. Fish said. If they aren’t considered “adverse,” the effort at further environmental study can end. But if the factors are “adverse,” they should move forward and hire either BFJ or another experienced company to examine the details and file a GEIS.

That the Island has issues with protecting groundwater, for example, doesn’t, in and of itself, require a GEIS, Mr. Fish said. The question is whether anything in the  plan is “significant” in its effect on groundwater, and if so, is that an “adverse” affect.

Those two words are critical to determining whether a GEIS is necessary, Mr. Fish said.

Clinging to the possibility that a short Environmental Assessment Form could be sufficient, the Board could have seen its way clear to meet the timeline Ms. Brach-Williams had previously outlined.

But if a full GEIS is necessary, Noah Levine, who has been leading the BFJ team, told the Town Board a full study could take between 12 and 18 months and cost more than $100,000.

So if there’s a way to avoid a full GEIS, why not grab it?

Bob DeLuca of the Group for the East End strode to the lectern to make the case for a full GEIS. He’s a strong environmentalist with an extensive background in the ins and outs of SEQRA, the State Environmental Quality Review Act.

Responding to a query from Deputy Supervisor Meg Larsen, Mr. DeLuca acknowledged he’s representing about 100 Islanders who have engaged him out of concern for environmental factors. They fear there are aspects of the draft plan that are not strong enough to protect sensitive wetlands and the Near Shore and Peninsula Overlay District.

Mr. DeLuca’s message to the Town Board was that a failure to conduct a GEIS of the plan would mean, when large projects on the Island are proposed, GEIS studies would have to be done for each. Conducting a GEIS on the Comprehensive Plan would enable it to function as “an umbrella,” protecting the town from having to order many repeat and lengthy SEQRA studies for these projects.

The State Department of Environmental Conservation and Department of State recommend a GEIS of Comprehensive Plans, Mr. DeLuca said. Don’t discount following that advice if you want the Comp Plan to have meaning and depth, Mr. DeLuca advised the Board.

Resident Stephen Jacobs said the contract with BFJ Consultants stated it did not anticipate a need for a long SEQRA study.

Mr. Levine jumped in, explaining that at the stage when the contract was negotiated with the town, it was meant to define the limits of services to be included. If the firm is hired to complete a GEIS, there would have to be a further charge not covered by the contract.

Would the town hire BJF for that purpose, Jan Sudol of the Friends of Coecles Harbor asked.

That’s to be decided by the Town Board, Ms. Brach-Williams responded.

While all this is being worked out, resident Bill Mastro asked if the Town Board will continue to work on code changes. The supervisor assured him that process will continue.

Currently, Ms. Larsen, who leads the Comp Plan Task Force, is reviewing a draft from the consultants and hopes it will be ready for review by the members of CPAC.

She hopes it will pass muster with them so it can be sent to the Town Board, the Suffolk County Planning Commission and be made available to the community within two weeks.

Mr. Sudol started to question what he thought was a call in the draft for a townwide public water system. But Ms. Larsen corrected him, saying the Comp Plan only calls for a study of what might be needed in areas where potable water isn’t available.

The draft plan does not call for a townwide public water system or, in fact, any specific water system, she said. It simply seeks a study to determine the extent and location of problems and how to deal with them.

Former officials at Town Hall

In an unusual twist at Tuesday’s Town Board work session, there were more former town officials in the audience than current members at the table.

Their presence wasn’t accidental. Rallied by former Town Board member Peter Reich — the only one of the five former officials to speak to the Board at the outset — the others were former supervisors Al Kilb and Art Williams and former Town Board members Glen Waddington and Paul Shepherd.

Mr. Reich began his brief remarks thanking Supervisor Amber Brach-Williams for bringing civility and transparency to the Town Board and for getting agendas out early. Mr. Reich told the Board that many people around town want to understand why the Board is deadlocked, and he and the other former office holders came to see “what’s going on.”

Councilman Benjamin Dyett asked if there were any specific issues. Mr. Reich replied there were just “generic” questions.

“I came to see for myself,” he said.

An announced candidate for the Town Board, Gordon Gooding, was present. During a late afternoon break the two Democratic Town Board members, Mr. Dyett and Albert Dickson, huddled with Mr. Gooding, their former running mate.