1 Photo
Residents of Meadow Lane in the Village of Southampton have filed a lawsuit against the Southampton Town Trustees and the village in an effort to shut down public access to their backyard, a stretch of beach known as “The Picnic Area.”
The lawsuit was filed by Nica B. Strunk on behalf of Kathleen Araskog Thomas, Andrew S. Thomas, Rand V. Araskog and Jessie M. Araskog on Wednesday, October 21.
According to the lawsuit, the claimants believe 2,500 beach permits were issued in 2015. The suit says that the Town Trustees and Village of Southampton did not make any effort to control the number of vehicles that occupy the area at one time. The Araskog and Thomas families also believe that there were in excess of 500 vehicles parked in five rows parallel to the ocean during peak times.
With this many people on the beach at one time, the families say the village allowed “unsafe overcrowding, uncontrolled public intoxication, urination, defecation and littering on the claimants’ private property, outdoor fires, unleashed dogs and an illegal thoroughfare across the claimant’s land for ingress and egress to Suffolk County’s Shinnecock East Park.”
The Southampton village code does not allow people to drive on the beach between the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on the majority of beaches, but an exception lies with a 2,000-foot section of beach between the western boundary of the village and Road F, where residents of Southampton town and village are permitted to drive on the beach.
The piece of property in question has been open to the public for as long as Southampton Town Trustee Eric Shultz can remember.
“The property owners knew the easement was there before buying, and knew the people had the right to use the beach” said Mr. Shultz. “The people that use the area respect the beach and leave it cleaner than when they arrived. I have always seen it orderly, and the continued use needs to be preserved.”
Members of Southampton Association for Beach Access, or SABA, said tn a prepared statement that Southampton residents have been regularly using the drive-on picnic area “since long before 2004, the year the Araskog/Thomas family purchased the property.
“They cannot expect local laws to change to benefit one or several homeowners [to] the detriment of the remaining freeholders and residents,” the statement said.
When Ms. Strunk was asked whether the owners knew about the public beach access behind their property, she said, “After speaking with my clients, they’ve asked me not to elaborate on the case.”
The State Department of Environmental Conservation was also listed as a defendant in the case, with the suit saying that the state allows the heavy use of the beach despite more stringent controls at other bathing beaches.
According to Mr. Shultz, the popularity of the picnic area is proof that additional beaches should be opened. In particular, Mr. Shultz feels more beaches should be opened on the west side of Shinnecock Inlet, and he has been an advocate for this proposal for many years.
“We plan to support the Trustees in any way we can for as long as we can. Hopefully something good will come of this,” SABA said in its statement. “Perhaps we can get the space allowed for all-day [four-wheel drive]access expanded so we aren’t concentrated in one area.”
This isn’t the first time that homeowners on Meadow Lane have sued over the used of the Picnic Area. Attempts were made to have it closed in 1997 and 2005, but both claims were dismissed.
Greg Wehner on Oct 22, 2015