A church seeking to stockpile construction materials on its site was front and center on the Dec. 4 agenda of the East Hampton Town Planning Board.
“If not used for a private business, the applicant should explain the church operations which require a stockpile of construction materials on site,” read a dry note in a Planning Department memo about the Hampton Church’s application. The church, at 69 Industrial Road in Wainscott, is seeking to expand and improve its parking lot and to legalize an outside storage area.
Marco Penafiel, a designer speaking for the church, told the board that the materials were donations. “The company provides services at no charge to the church,” said Mr. Penafiel. “They provide weekly maintenance to the church at no charge. That is why you’re going to see the trucks on the property a lot.”
“If it’s materials that are going to be used for a construction project on church property, that’s one thing,” said Ed Krug, a board member. “If a contractor is using it as his storage area, that’s another thing.”
Paul Kelley, a board member of the church and the son of its pastor, Joe Kelley, who also runs a construction business, said, “There are leftover materials. Some of it stays because we may need it someday.”
The board members continued to press.
“Did the construction company plow the driveway, and in exchange for that work, did you allow them to park their trucks in the back?” asked Michael Hansen.
“No. There’s no agreement,” Mr. Kelley replied. “Sometimes they bring trucks there and leave them, and sometimes they take them.”
“You understand where it might appear there’s a quid pro quo,” said Samuel Kramer, the chairman of the board. “At the end of the day, you either have a church, or you have a church and a construction company.”
“As a board member of the church, we’re here to comply with the town,” said Mr. Kelley. “I’m certainly not here to obfuscate and have a secret storage house for a construction company in the back of the church.”
Tina Vavilis-LaGarenne, the acting director of the Planning Department, indicated that because it is a commercially zoned parcel, the construction company could, in fact, coexist with the church, if that was wanted. “You could have a storage area, but it needs to be properly configured,” she said.
The board barely touched on the other requests in the application, among them an increase from 60 to 86 parking spaces and changes to a playground. Ms. Vavilis-LaGarenne said she would work with the church to better understand the existing site conditions and the long-term plan before it is brought back before the board.
The evening’s second application, across the street at 54 Industrial Road, involved a proposed 39,654-square-foot self-storage building with 89 large self-storage units on the first floor; smaller, climate-controlled areas on the second floor, and a 19,000-square-foot, car-accessible, unfinished basement.
The proposal needs site-plan approval and a special permit. However, rather than discuss the layout, the board zeroed in on a driveway leading to the huge basement.
“A lot of questions about the basement are speculative,” said Liz Vail, an attorney speaking for 54 Industrial Road Owners, L.L.C. “It is on the plan as ‘an unfinished basement.’ That’s the proposed use. It’s not going to be used in connection with the business of self-storage. It’s not going to be a private garage. It’s not going to be leased out as a separate entity at all. Planning boards are not allowed to speculate that applicants will break the law or deviate from proposed plans,” she added, citing case law.
“There’s lots of representations of what it’s not going to be,” said Mr. Kramer. “My question is, do you want to put it in writing? A ‘C and R’?” (“C and R” stands for “covenants and restrictions,” and is a supplemental agreement between the applicant and the town setting rules on how a property may be used.)
“If we have to, sure,” said Ms. Vail.
“Why have a ramp that goes down with a garage door below grade, if you’re not going to put a car down there. Why have that?” asked Mr. Hansen.
“Just because it’s not being used in connection with the self-storage business doesn’t mean it can’t be used by the owner of that business to store their own items,” Ms. Vail answered.
“A C and R could be helpful,” said Mr. Krug. “I personally would like more of a narrative about what the intention is, beyond ‘maybe the owner of the building wants to throw stuff down there.’ ”
There was some question as to whether an eave of the building needed lowering, because of its proximity to the East Hampton Town Airport. This was the second time this year the planning board had reviewed the application, and members indicated that their previous concerns regarding the mass of the building, impervious surfaces, and various other questions had not been properly addressed.
