Featured Story

Shelter Island Heights Manager: Planning Board process ‘broken’

The Planning Board was forced to keep the Jan. 14 public hearing open on the 7 Chequit application, which is being fought by neighbors concerned about plans for an accessory structure on the site that might affect other properties.

The delay came at the end of a more than one-hour discussion on the plans, which proved not ready for any decision, since some reports that should have been available to the public prior to the hearing had not been posted on the Town website.

Two critical reports, one from June 28, 2024 and the second dated Oct. 21, 2024 —  from P.W. Grosser, the environmental consultant hired by the Town — were not available on the website prior to the public hearing, Heights Property Owners Corporation (HPOC) General Manager Stella Lagudis said.

A report from Southampton Town Principal Planner Theresa Masin also wasn’t available on the Town website,  Ms. Lagudis said. “Who is picking and choosing what the public gets to see?” she asked, calling it “a pretty big problem.”

The process at the least is “very sloppy” or at the worst, there’s “something illicit going on,” she said.

Other reports, including an environmental determination under SEQRA (New York State Environmental Quality Review Act), could not be completed prior to the hearing’s conclusion, to ensure all issues raised by the public could be investigated.

Only one issue could be clarified last week — despite calls for the Town Board to take over decisions on the application, that can’t happen.

The court that sent the matter back to the Planning Board to provide a full environmental study of the project has charged the Planning Board, not the Town Board, with making a final decision on the application. It now appears that decision is at least a month away and very possibly two or more months from a final decision.

Planning Board member Julia Weisenberg expressed concerns about drainage proposals.

Matt Sherman of Sherman Engineering and Consulting said he designed the dry wells providing drainage in line with the Town code. His plan won’t exacerbate a problem that doesn’t already exist, he said.

Ms. Weisenberg said she’s concerned about flooding affecting neighboring properties.

Increasing drainage would help, Ms. Lagudis said.

In a rare move, HPOC has joined neighbors in the effort to try to block the issuance of a wetlands permit for the project. “The Heights is still opposing this project,” Ms. Lagudis said. And not just because of environmental concerns, she said. “The process has been and continues to be broken,” she said.

Planning board member David Austin said he’s pleased the wetlands code has been targeted for changes because “it has problems.”

Ms. Lagudis said HPOC hadn’t objected to a similar project at 10 Chequit because it involved a means of saving a unique house. But the plan being proposed at 7 Chequit is for an accessory structure.

She argued that the owners could eliminate the need for construction within the 100-foot setback area by reducing the size of the building area. There is no hardship situation that needs to be considered by the Planning Board, Ms. Lagudis said.

She also questioned why the Conservation Advisory Council hadn’t weighed in on the application, and CAC co-chairman Howard Johansen said the application had not reached the CAC.

P.W. Grosser Vice President Kim Gennaro-Oancea said she had a signed receipt showing someone at Town Hall had received the reports and request that the CAC review the application. But Mr. Johansen said, “We have never seen revised plans at the CAC.”

Ms. Gennaro-Oancea said she would provide the receipt indicating who signed for the information. The process provides that the CAC would have 45 days to examine the material and render its opinion.

“This process has not gone very well,” Ms. Lagudis said, noting the HPOC has spent a lot of time and money and even gone to court to challenge the Planning Board’s decision on the 7 Chequit application.

Resident Lori Beard Raymond also noted there have been several sets of plans submitted for the project and it’s important to know which is the most recent set. “I think it’s time that we make note of the fact there have been mistakes made,” she said.

Attorney Timothy Hill said the public hearing can’t be kept open forever because the SEQRA process can’t start until the hearing is closed. But if there is information that hasn’t been available to the public, the hearing should be kept open.

With that advice, the planners agreed to keep the hearing open.