Despite concerns from one board member about setting an unwelcome precedent, the East Hampton Town Board voted three to one — with one recusal — to exempt the planned senior citizens center in Amagansett from local zoning and land-use regulations.
The legal justification is based on a 1988 New York State Court of Appeals case, Matter of County of Monroe, which established a test to exempt local jurisdictions from land use and zoning regulations based on nine factors, such as the nature and scope of the project, the impact of the proposal, and the extent of the public interest being served.
The town would otherwise have been bound by local zoning laws for the proposed 22,000-square-foot senior citizens center, which is set to be located on seven acres of town property on Abraham’s Path in Amagansett.
Prior to the passing of the resolution, the public weighed in, objecting to the effects on the local ecosystem, raising the issue of a potential tax burden, and voicing concern for the perceived violation of local zoning laws.
Jeffrey Bragman, an attorney and former board member critical of the project, came forward first, asserting that the current attendance at the senior center is between 15 and 30 people each day. Supervisor Kathee Burke-Gonzalez said later that his statement was “complete misinformation.”
“I’m going to call it a lie,” Deputy Supervisor Cate Rogers said immediately after.
Mr. Bragman brought up an online survey from the town, saying that 50 percent of respondents said they had not used the senior center in five years. The other 50 percent, he said, only use it one to three times a year.
“Public participation was deliberately and intentionally thwarted,” he continued. The site plan was selected in January 2023, he went on, “and at that point, the board had waited for almost a year until Dec. 7, 2023, and then hustled through all the steps to start this project on the road to approval.” Only one public hearing was held on the subject, Mr. Bragman continued.
As for the present, “the point of Monroe is that it exempts the town from any kind of review. It puts the town board solely in charge.” The project will include 300 percent more clearing — a total of 240,000 square feet — than typically allowed by law, he argued, because of the Monroe decision.
“You are not elected to be the largest developer in the Town of East Hampton,” he said. Later, he added, “The most insulting and arrogant part of the findings is that they denigrate the community objections.”
Mr. Bragman concluded his remarks by stating that the town is treating its funds like “Monopoly money,” and argued that the project “should not move forward.”
Alexander (Sas) Peters, an advocate for aquifer protection, stood up next to argue that the town board is “violating all of our town’s environmental protections, ramming ahead with a close to $30 million project that virtually nobody wants.”
Mr. Peters then discussed a personal survey he conducted of 40 local older residents, and only one was in favor of the new senior center, he said.
Of his friends surveyed, “39 were completely against it. Nobody uses it, nobody wants the tax bill, and nobody wants to raze seven acres of land that are vital for aquifer protection and home to an endangered species that is almost extinct everywhere else in the world.”
At a recent meeting of the Amagansett Citizens Advisory Committee, 14 people objected to the building, Mr. Peters said. They were “horrified at the environmental cost.” The forest is home to an endangered bat, he added, which thrives near the railroad tracks in Amagansett.
“No developer could ever get away with this, but this town board doesn’t care,” Mr. Peters said, before alluding to a recent decision by the town board to not allow houses over 10,000 square feet. Now, he argued, the board wants to build a 22,000-square-foot building.
After the public comment portion of the meeting, Tina Vavilis-LaGarenne, the acting planning director, took the podium to inform the town board that the environmental review conducted was “extensive and thorough.”
Specifically, the proposal was coordinated with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service on numerous occasions. In the final months of 2024, the process of review was completed.
A study in September from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-approved professionals concluded that there were “no significant adverse impacts anticipated,” as far as the northern long-eared bat is concerned, which opponents of the project argued would be affected by the facility.
Ms. Vavilis-LaGarenne concluded by saying that the environmental review conducted met the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and “it was extensive.”
“The conclusions of the review that I’m talking about here today are supported by detailed technical studies and have been thoroughly vetted by myself and all of you,” Ms. Vavilis-LaGarenne said.
At the end of the meeting, Supervisor Burke-Gonzalez, Deputy Supervisor Rogers, and Councilman David Lys voted in favor of a resolution exempting the project from planning and zoning regulations. Councilman Ian Calder-Piedmonte opted to recuse himself, while the dissenting vote came from Councilman Tom Flight.
“There’s aspects that personally I am uncomfortable with,” Councilman Flight said, “but that’s not what this is about.” Mr. Flight then went on to explain his objection to the measure, saying that he believes the senior center needs improvement as it stands right now.
The situation at hand, though, is “more about Monroe itself, and whether this is the right decision for the town to take in circumnavigating the typical process,” he said, and went on to voice concern for the “precedent this might set.”
