'Truck Beach' Trial Concludes

A trial to determine the ownership of and access to what is popularly known as Truck Beach, a 4,000-foot stretch of ocean beach on Napeague, concluded in State Supreme Court, Riverhead, on Monday, with Justice Ralph Gazzillo telling lawyers for property owners, the Town of East Hampton, and the town trustees that a decision was unlikely before Labor Day.

Homeowners mounted a broad attack on beach-driving, claiming it threatens public health and degrades the environment, putting upland properties at increased risk of flooding. The defense countered with testimony from residents who recalled driving on the beach more than 50 years ago and dismissed suggestions that conditions have ever been hazardous.

Testifying on June 8 was Lance Pomerantz, an attorney and land title expert, who was taken through an exhaustive examination of deeds held by multiple property owners’ associations. He told Stephen Angel, representing the plaintiffs, that each title he had examined extended to the high-water mark on the beach and demonstrated no ownership interest by the town or trustees.

Under cross-examination by Anthony Tohill, representing the trustees, Mr. Pomerantz read aloud language in a number of surveys stating that “the developer does not purport to hold or convey title to lands south of the beach grass line.” But such notations, he said under questioning from Mr. Angel, do not convey title to any party.

On Monday, James Catterson, representing one of the homeowners, interrogated Bill Taylor, a trustee and former East Hampton Town harbormaster. Reading passages from the town’s local waterfront revitalization plan, he sought to portray a town and residents flouting the document’s recommendations.

Although storms are the primary cause of erosion, Mr. Catterson read, “beach driving also increases it by retarding protective vegetation. For instance, at the east end of Marine Boulevard in Amagansett the trustee right-ofway onto the beach receives a high volume of [off-road vehicle] traffic,” destabilizing the dune.

Mr. Taylor also read from the L.W.R.P., which points out that the trustees generally disagree with that assessment.

Mr. Catterson continued reading passages referring to off-road vehicles’ impact on vegetation, shorebirds’ nesting habitat, and beach grass, the latter reducing a beach’s ability to recover from storms. Mr. Taylor called the passages “overstated,” recalling dissenting views during the document’s creation. Beach grass is not adversely affected if drivers maintain the required 50-foot distance, he said. In fact, Mr. Taylor said, he had been to the beach the day before. “The beach is in fine, excellent condition,” he said.

Also on Monday, the plaintiffs called Charles Voorhis, an environmental planning consultant. The ridges that develop around tire tracks, he said, can cause a net migration of sand toward the ocean.

Beach driving, he said, can also affect a dune’s ability to form and remain, crush beach grass’s root runners, and adversely affect wildlife through habitat destruction and stress.

Referring to a video prepared by the plaintiffs, Mr. Voorhis said it depicts tire ruts on the dune and four-wheel-drive vehicles parked in and among beach grass, and that multiple still photographs depict similar prohibited activity. Beach driving, he said, promotes erosion, destabilizing the dune and allowing floodwaters to reach residential properties.

Under cross-examination, Mr. Voorhis told Michael Rikon, representing the town, that during a Monday, June 6, visit to the site he had not personally observed damage to shorebird nesting areas, nor vehicles speeding, driving, or parked on the dune or beach grass.

Last week, plaintiffs sought to portray a dangerous environment with trucks weaving through crowds, including children playing, and people and dogs urinating and defecating in the dunes. On Monday, the defense addressed that depiction.

Margery Courtney of Springs said she first drove on the beach in question in 1966, while a student at East Hampton High School, as a passenger in friends’ beach buggies. Mr. Rikon asked Ms. Courtney if she considered it a public beach available to residents of the town. “It was a beautiful, lovely beach that our community used and went to,” she answered.

Then, as now, people observed regulations, she said. “That beach is extremely well maintained, cared for, clean.” She said she had never seen an accident, nor any police activity apart from regular patrols.

Stephen Angel, representing the plaintiffs, asked her how people relieved themselves, given that there are no public restrooms. They can drive to Atlantic Avenue Beach, to the west, she said. “It’s not a problem.” Timothy Taylor, an East Hampton resident who is the president of Citizens for Access Rights, was called to the witness stand. He said he was among the beachgoers who bring portable toilets, such as those used by campers, while others drive to Atlantic Avenue. “Our group prides itself on leaving the beach in better condition at the end of the day than we find it,” he said, adding that CfAR also holds twice-a-year beach cleanups.

Bradley Beyer, who grew up in Sag Harbor and lives in Springs, recalled the thrill of riding in a jeep on the beach as a child in the late 1950s or early ’60s.

Mr. Rikon asked him if upland properties had been developed in his youth.

“Yeah, we built a lot of them, from way back when to the present day,” he said.

Was the beach used before those houses were built? “Oh God, yes,” he said.

Like Ms. Courtney, he was adamant that regulations were observed and upheld by beachgoers. If a truck drove over the 15-miles-per-hour speed limit, “20 people would stand right in front, wave them down, call them an idiot. . . . Everybody watched out for the kids.” Mr. Rikon asked Mr. Beyer if anyone from an upland property had ever told him to leave the beach, as it was private property. No, he said, but one resident would often come to the beach, with his dog, to visit him and his family.

Lawyers for the property owners continued to portray an overcrowded and dangerous situation. Catharine Regan, who is married to Kenneth Silverman, a plaintiff, told the court she lives about 100 feet from the cut in the dune at the end of Marine Boulevard. She said she had counted approximately 250 vehicles on the beach during last year’s Fourth of July weekend.

Mr. Taylor disputed that count, telling Mr. Rikon that he had counted 78 vehicles on a sunny Sunday last summer.

The town is proceeding with plans to condemn the disputed portion of the beach, which may involve additional, costly litigation. On Monday night, at a trustees meeting that ended more than 12 hours after his interrogation began in Riverhead, Mr. Taylor told his colleagues that Justice Gazzillo had “admonished us that we’re on the brink of spending millions” on litigation.

The trustees were considering a strikingly similar dispute, this one from residents of Driftwood Lane in Springs, a private development, in which recent property owners are asserting that the beach in front of their house is private.

(The trustees’ meeting is covered separately in this issue.) The trustees, like Justice Gazzillo, urged the parties to avoid litigation and reach an amicable solution.