2 Photos
Charleston detail. MARSHALL WATSON
More than two dozen Hampton Bays residents have filed a lawsuit in State Supreme Court challenging the Southampton Town Board’s approval of a townhouse development on the eastern shore of the Shinnecock Canal and the renovation of the Canoe Place Inn.
A statement released this week by the group’s attorney, Jennifer Juengst, explains that the suit will seek to overturn the town’s approval in January of a special zoning change, called a planned development district or PDD, that cleared the path for developers Gregg and Mitchell Rechler to construct 37 townhouses on approximately 4.5 acres on the canal’s eastern shoreline. The approval also permits the cousins to redevelop the Canoe Place Inn property on the western side of the canal by restoring the existing building into a 25-room inn, adding a cluster of guest cottages and opening a 300-seat catering hall on the estimated 5.6-acre inn property. A septic treatment system connected to the townhouses would be constructed on a third property on the east side of the waterway and on North Road, adjacent a residential neighborhood where most of the residents filing the suit live.
“The suit argues that state environmental law prohibits benefiting a builder at the expense of the community,” the statement from Ms. Juengst reads. “The Rechler deal cannot be justified because it benefits the developer at the expense of the people who already live there.”
One of the many plaintiffs in the suit, Rita Knox, said residents of the small neighborhood on the east side of North Road were appalled at the Town Board’s decision to allow the development, and the siting of the septic treatment system on the property in their neighborhood.
“The Town Board’s decision is something that should frighten every … resident of Hampton Bays,” Ms. Knox said. “Until the last minute, we had hoped the town was going to do the right thing. We were very disheartened that the representatives of the town were doing nothing to protect the community. We were all left scratching our heads.”
Ms. Knox said that 32 residents, from her neighborhood and other parts of Hampton Bays, have already contributed financial support to the legal challenge and that several others have pledged additional support as legal fees require in the future.
Southampton Town Attorney Tiffany Scarlato said she had seen the statement by Ms. Juengst but, as of Tuesday evening, the town had yet to be served with the lawsuit.
Ms. Juengst said the Article 78 lawsuit was filed on Tuesday, the day before the four-month statute of limitations on challenging the project was to expire, and that the town would be served soon.
Town Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst said she was confident the approval of the project would stand up to the challenge in the eyes of a court.
“I think we are on very solid ground,” said Ms. Throne-Holst, who convinced the Rechlers to abandon their original plans to raze the Canoe Place Inn and build timeshares it its place, of the legal challenge. “It’s a shame that we live in this litigious environment and that we’re going to have to spend taxpayer money on a lawsuit that I’m sure is on air-tight footing.”
The two-pronged development project was approved, despite not conforming to area zoning, by virtue of the town’s PDD legislation, which allows a supermajority of the Town Board to exempt a property from the town’s zoning code if a project presents a superlative benefit to the public.
Prior to unanimously approving the project, Town Board members said the redevelopment would benefit Hampton Bays by saving the crumbling inn and that the off-site wastewater treatment facility servicing the townhouses would better protect both the groundwater and nearby bay better than if they permitted as-of-right development along the canal.
Ms. Knox said all of the plaintiffs in the forthcoming suit were among the dozens of Hampton Bays residents who raised objections to the development plans at a series of public hearing sessions held last summer and fall. Many objected to the fact that a long succession of planning studies conducted by the town over the last four decades all recommended that the canal’s eastern shoreline be developed with a mix of retail and restaurant commercial establishments.
Town Board members charged, based on assessments by the Rechlers, that such commercial development of the canal property was not viable. Nonetheless, the Rechlers pointed to their ability to develop up to three restaurants and a small motel on the canal-side property, which sits between Montauk Highway and the Long Island Rail Road trestle, as the alternative to the townhouse development.
Gregg Rechler released a statement on Wednesday afternoon through a spokesman, saying: We are unable to comment on the suit because we have not been served," the statement reads. "However, we have the highest level of confidence in the process that resulted in a unanimous vote of approval for the plan by the Southampton Town Toard."
"
on May 13, 2015