Letters

Boosters of the now-annulled Local Law 12, like Anthony Vermandois [“Not Saving Sag Harbor,” Letters, April 20], have implied that Save Sag Harbor’s opposition to it equals opposition to affordable housing. That charge, demonstrably false, distracts attention from the profound problems of the law, which was rightly struck down by the courts.

Mr. Vermandois says it’s unfair to judge Local Law 12 on the basis of Adam Potter’s widely panned proposal, because it would have been “scaled down or modified” in the village’s review process. But the problems with the law go way beyond the shortcomings of one project. Unfortunately, these issues got little or no public airing as the law was being drafted.

His mention of review boards highlights the first problem: The law transferred critical powers of our long-established boards to the village trustees, or removed their authority over vital matters such as store sizes. It gave elected officials who turn over every two years powers normally reserved for volunteer board members with specific expertise.

The law, in the name of “special exceptions” for affordable housing, altered basic tools of our zoning code, removing parking formulas, allowing mergers of lots, changing lot coverage and height limits, while increasing allowable density twenty-fold. In effect, it created a new building type, mixed-use affordable, and offered a package of variances that developers could now get as of right, without requiring board review.

Set aside Potter’s project — Local Law 12 could have reshaped our Main Street, because it dropped existing dimension limits on commercial spaces. Ever since our community banded together 15 years ago to prevent oversized chain stores from overrunning Main Street, the village has crafted planning and zoning codes to protect the mom-and-pop, historic, pedestrian-friendly character of our downtown. One key regulation capped the size of shops at 2,000 square feet, expandable to 3,000 feet with architectural review board permission.

The law would have permitted a developer, anywhere in the 22 acres of our village business or office districts, to create stores up to 10,000 square feet, so long as there are affordable apartments above. This would allow exactly the sort of store — say, a chain pharmacy — that we’ve battled so hard to keep out of Main Street.

In short, Local Law 12, whatever the intentions behind it, reversed 15 years of carefully developed planning and zoning policy for the village, and stripped our code book of fundamental measures to protect it. Mr. Vermandois calls these “easily solvable loopholes,” but when you take away all these loopholes, there’s precious little law left standing.

In annulling the law, the court has given us an opportunity to consider more sensible affordable housing solutions for Sag Harbor. Let’s seize it.

Peter Ginna

Sag Harbor

Ginna is a member of the board of Save Sag Harbor — Ed.