A public hearing on East Hampton Town’s new senior citizens center last Thursday drew just two comments from just two people, both of them urging the town board to allow the fullest possible review by the planning board and architectural review board.
The architects hired to design the new center, to be situated on seven acres at 403 Abraham’s Path in Amagansett, told the board in a Nov. 21 presentation that the design development phase of the 22,000-square-foot, $31.6 million project was all-but complete. Clearing is intended to begin next month, with construction slated to begin in mid-2024.
That presentation followed almost a decade of planning: In December 2014 a senior services committee issued a final report to the board that concluded that the existing senior citizens center on Springs-Fireplace Road in East Hampton “is inadequate for the types of programs and services that are needed to meet the current and future needs of the growing older adult community.”
Last Thursday, Jaine Mehring agreed with the need for a new center that would serve the community for decades to come, but offered several critiques. She said there was a lack of “actual usage data” that “is quite relevant to the decision of how big and how much to spend on the new facility,” such as updated statistics on daily users of the existing center and the number of meals served there. “That really, I think, should be the basis of some detailed projections for data going forward,” she said.
Moreover, “It’s my view that this public hearing appears to be happening somewhat too soon,” Ms. Mehring said, acknowledging that planning has occurred over several years. “But if this public hearing is one that will quickly follow to a resolution to approve the plan in full, then I do think it’s too soon for just a couple reasons.” The latest cost estimate came just weeks ago, at the Nov. 21 work session. That estimate has ballooned as the project has developed, she noted, “and you’re targeting to start clearing for next month. So I would have hoped that there could have been some public vetting, prior to a public hearing and moving forward, around some things that I think and imagine a lot of citizens might want to understand now about the cost analysis.”
Is the latest estimate “truly the all-in cost?” she asked. Is it a best, worst, or middle-case scenario, and what could cause it to change? Its operating budget compared to the existing center’s has not been disclosed, she said, and “I’m not sure if the public all understands how the project gets financed, the impact it will have on the town’s annual budget, the capital plan, and potentially on property taxes, if at all.”
The town is confronting an affordable housing deficit “in an era where land values explode,” she added, and “we haven’t come to terms yet with what the real costs are going to be to deal with climate change and sea level rise and managed retreat. That’s why I have to look at all these choices we make in that context.”
A project’s true cost, Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc said, cannot be known until it is put out to bid. “This is all part of that process,” he said.
Ms. Mehring also urged the board to “seek the fullest review possible” from the planning board and the architectural review board, something former Councilman Jeff Bragman took further in his remarks to the board. In declaring itself the lead agency on the project, “this is quite similar to the way that the board has handled other projects,” he said, “where you’re effectively exempting yourself from zoning, because your boards are not actually granting approvals or conditioning this project in a way that binds you, correct?”
The town board would seek review and comment from those boards, Mr. Van Scoyoc said, but “the ultimate authority on municipal projects, with the exception of those codified to the contrary, is up to the town board.”
But that, Mr. Bragman protested, “subordinates the boards that really have the jurisdiction to do the reviewing. As you know, under state law the Town of East Hampton has delegated all of its zoning and planning authority to a zoning board, a planning board, and the A.R.B.” Under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, “the appropriate lead agency is the agency that has the broadest jurisdictional powers over the project.” In his opinion, that is the planning board “because that’s the board that has charge of site plan review, special permit review.”
It is better policy for the board and the public “not to have the town board as a ‘super planner’ making the ultimate decisions on SEQRA,” he said, suggesting that the planning board be made the lead agency “because they have the broadest jurisdiction.”
The hearing was closed, but the written record was left open until today. Mr. Bragman said that he would submit written comments.
