Letters

Recent Letters to the Editor implied that conflicts of interest may exist among land-use personnel. In response, a member of Southampton’s Zoning Board of Appeals wrote that board members habitually recuse themselves where conflicts exist [“Repressive Fantasy,” Letters, May 2]. I’m sure that’s true, as far as it goes.

In 2018, the ZBA determined that a golf course was permissible as an accessory to a residential subdivision located on 600 acres in the Pine Barrens of East Quogue (known as the Lewis Road Planned Residential Development).

I believe one of the ZBA members who approved the golf course served as a former Suffolk County aide to former Southampton Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman, a vocal supporter of the Lewis Road PRD. Mr. Schneiderman’s former legislative aide did nothing wrong, but it’s hard to believe he would have voted against a project endorsed by his old boss.

This type of indirect assistance can be found to exist between friends, business associates and family members who, other than board members, may benefit indirectly from a land-use decision.

Without taking sides, it may pay to review the ZBA’s approval of the golf course. Wayne Bruyn, a Southampton lawyer and former Planning Department employee, argued on behalf of Discovery Land, the owner of the 600-acre Lewis Road PRD. Mr. Bruyn referred to other golf courses in Southampton that have been permitted on residential properties.

However, it appears that one of those referenced golf courses was permitted because the owner built a nine-hole golf course and reduced development from 80 houses to five houses. Discovery Land plans to build an 18-hole course and increase development.

Another referenced golf course was permitted via the issuance of a special zoning vehicle created to replace a raceway. The use of that zoning vehicle was rescinded in 2010.

So it appears that the references used by Discovery Land may be false equivalencies. I’m not suggesting that Wayne Bruyn did anything wrong. He’s a lawyer and is expected to argue on behalf of his client. However, I believe the use of a defunct zoning vehicle to justify an accessory golf course without the relinquishment of development rights on the 600-acre parcel should have been questioned by the ZBA.

Also, I would like to reiterate that the land-use boards never explained how the Lewis Road golf course resort in East Quogue conformed to a PRD. The argument made by the land-use boards that Discovery Land has dedicated 65 percent of the 600 acres to open space is misleading. Open space on a PRD can be built upon, subdivided and sold. The zoning code that defines a PRD (Section 247) describes what can be built on open space on a PRD.

Susan Cerwinski

East Quogue