1 Photo
A view of the proposed site of the Lewis Road residential Planned Development. PRESS FILE
Does the Lewis Road housing and golf course proposal in East Quogue meet the standards of the Long Island Pine Barrens Act and its Comprehensive Land Use Plan?
That’s the question members of the Central Pine Barrens Commission were slated to deliberate on Wednesday afternoon, January 13, with a vote potentially following as soon as a week later. But the protracted review of the largest development ever proposed in the Pine Barrens confronted a new challenge this week.
Carrie Meek Gallagher, the commission chairwoman and director of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s Long Island office, representing Governor Andrew Cuomo, resigned. She will become the DEC’s executive deputy commissioner, second in command of the entire DEC.
That left the five-member commission down a member.
If approved, the Lewis Road Residential Planned Development would comprise a 118-unit golf course resort in East Quogue. And approval seems likely, given that Ms. Meek Gallagher and Commissioner Ed Romaine, the Brookhaven Town supervisor, have been the only two members to appear opposed to the plan.
With the chairwoman’s resignation, Executive Director John Pavacic can assume the role of acting chairman. “Regular practice of the commission has been to temporarily appoint me as acting, nonvoting chair to run the meeting,” he said. Traditionally, the local DEC director has been appointed chair of the commission.
“The governor has an obligation to assure that he has an appointee represent him when the commission meets,” Mr. Romaine said. It’s unlikely, however, that the governor will have someone appointed to fill Ms. Gallagher’s seat in time for this week’s meeting.
During a preliminary vote in September that would have led to the project’s denial, the pair revealed their objections but were outvoted by colleagues Dorian Dale, County Executive Steve Bellone’s appointee; Riverhead Town Supervisor Yvette Aguiar; and Southampton Town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman.
A key driver of that vote was changes made to the proposal after the close of a public hearing. The changes meant a new public hearing had to be held and the commission’s action deadline was extended.
Mr. Romaine had argued the project had changed often enough and significantly enough to warrant abandoning the original application and starting over.
Local environmentalists, including Bob DeLuca of the Group for the East End, cast the same aspersions — to no avail — about making significant revisions to a plan after a public hearing has closed.
Environmentalists have excoriated Mr. Schneiderman, looking askance at the preliminary process that took place before the Southampton Town Planning Board on his watch. The supervisor drew criticism when he directed a town planner to review the proposal and make recommendations while it was under review by Pine Barrens Commission land use staff.
At a subsequent public hearing in November, Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., who was a member of the original Pine Barrens Commission, said the town’s early review didn’t “pass the smell test.”
The proposal “flies in the face” of historic strategies for preserving and protecting the Pine Barrens, he said.
“This application is inconsistent with the Central Pine Barrens Act, inconsistent with the comprehensive management plan, inconsistent with the efforts and all the work that went into protecting the Pine Barrens in the first place, and I would urge the commission to reject this application,” the assemblyman testified.
This week, Mr. Schneiderman refuted the contention that he was giving the development special treatment.
“I never wanted this property developed,” he said, offering that he had hoped for its preservation, but the developer refuses. “The people who oppose this don’t want to see the land developed, but I don’t have that luxury.”
It’s his job, along with colleagues on the commission, to review the proposal and decide if it meets the standards for development in the Pine Barrens compatible growth area — the area, he said, “where development is supposed to happen.”
There are 20 standards the project has to meet, and analyzing compliance with them is, he said, “the only job I have.”
The proposal spans 600 acres, Mr. Schneiderman pointed out, and 400 of them will be preserved, with development confined to the remaining 200 acres. He said he would speak in detail during deliberations, outlining whether he feels the plan meets the standards.
Ms. Aguiar and Mr. Dale have both been relatively mum throughout the review process. Asked to offer insight about the project’s chances for approval or his particular leanings, Mr. Dale said, “As a commissioner, it behooves me to maintain judicious circumspection.”
Ms. Aguiar said she was studying the standards and, as the newest commissioner, “My vote is going to be driven by the Pine Barrens Act.”
While the Riverhead supervisor said she would apply the standards to the project’s merits, she also said she’d seek input from Mr. Schneiderman, since the project is in his town.
On Tuesday, Mr. Schneiderman noted that he’s seen support from many East Quogue residents, particularly when the property tax impact such a large development will have is considered. He reiterated his suspicion that opponents don’t want to see any development of any kind on the acreage, and that he’s obliged to review the proposal and decide if it complies with the Pine Barrens standards.
“I’m going to argue that it doesn’t meet the standards,” Mr. Romaine said this week.
In a year-end memo, obtained by The Express News Group, to fellow commissioners, principal planner Julie Hargrave and Executive Director Mr. Pavacic, the Brookhaven supervisor lists a dozen ways in which the plan doesn’t meet the guidelines.
Sewage treatment plan discharge has not been addressed and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval has not been attained, the lawmaker notes in his memo. He referenced expert testimony by Dr. Christopher Gobler of Stony Brook University, as well as written comments from the Long Island Pine Barrens Society and the Group for the East End, that question whether the proposal meets guidelines for nitrogen reduction, specifically calling into question the accuracy of nitrogen calculations.
Approvals from the DEC that demonstrate private well protection as well as stormwater runoff pollution prevention — necessary for making a determination about meeting related standards — have not been obtained.
Compliance with guidelines related to the drainage reserve area and ponds can’t be determined because information is still outstanding, Mr. Romaine’s memo notes. The same issue applies to Pine Barrens standards for unfragmented open space and soil erosion.
The project could have a negative impact on the habitat of the threatened coastal barrens buckmoth; however, the potential impact was not studied, Mr. Romaine noted.
Finally, the commissioner lists the failure to cluster development to its maximum extent and the failure to provide adequate buffers, particular on the east side of the property, among his reasons why the project does not conform with the Pine Barrens standards.
Speaking on Friday, and looking toward the January 13 deliberations, followed by a January 20 vote, Mr. Romaine was pragmatic. He predicted, “whether it’s approved or not approved, there’s going to be immediate litigation. It’s going to be instantaneous.”
Environmental groups have sued over earlier town approval, while the developer Discovery Land launched a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against the town and individual Town Board members when they failed to give a green light for an earlier iteration of the plan.
