news	« main articles
Updated: July 14, 2009, 10:55 pm	Share    Print    Email

The East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals remained steadfast in their positive declaration and request for lot coverage calculations that include additional parking before scheduling a public hearing. Photos by Aaron Boyd

East Hampton - The stand-off between the East Hampton Village Library and the Village Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) continued at the ZBA's Friday, June 26 meeting, as representatives for the library reasserted their stance on the proposed expansion should not be subjected to a full impact review as they contend that the library, as an educational institution, should be exempted.

The ZBA held firm in their request that the library provide a parking assessment and apply for a setback variance, despite library attorney William Esseks' provision of a letter from the general counsel for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) stating that the library should be exempt from environmental review as a Type II action under SEQRA.

Attorney William Esseks, representing the East Hampton Village Library, maintained that as an educational institution the library should be labeled a Type II action and exempt from the environmental review process.

The Village Library Board has had an application before the ZBA to add a 6,802 square-foot wing for over six years, the last of which has been embroiled in a dispute over whether a public facility such as a library should have to pass through all the rigors of the review process. According to the library's board of directors, the planned addition is needed to house 10,000 new childrens books and 5,000 high-demand adult books, as well as providing a larger lecture room and two additional homework rooms for students to use after school.

Citing DEC General Counsel and Deputy Commissioner Alison Crocker's determination that the library does constitute an educational facility, Esseks argued that the ZBA should reverse their positive declaration (on the need for an environmental impact statement) and allow the proposed expansion to go to a public hearing as submitted.

The ZBA members, however, refused to budge. "She was giving an opinion and this is the East Hampton Village Zoning Board," board member Lysabeth Marigold contended. "She doesn't know the circumstances here and she didn't have all the facts." While acknowledging Crocker's position and expertise, acting ZBA chair Joan Denny concurred with Marigold, adding, "If she had sat here for six years" throughout the process, her determination may have been different.

"If the application is complete, we can move on," Denny asserted, refusing to move ahead with a public hearing without lot coverage calculations that include additional parking spaces.

"In an effort to move ahead to a hearing we stated that we would submit to whatever parking the board required," Library Director Dennis Fabiszak explained. Representatives of the library had asked that the ZBA determine how much additional parking would be needed after the expansion at a previous meeting, however the board members declined to make that decision for the applicant.

ZBA member Lysabeth Marigold reasserted the board's stance that the applicant must supply all of the pertinent information to the board and that they will not tell the library how many spaces to add.

"You want the board to decide this application based on the proposal not to add more parking," Village Attorney Linda Riley clarified, as the ZBA would not add to the application before going to a hearing, "I just want to be clear that you are proposing no new parking."

"We are not arguing that no new parking is required," Fabiszak explained. "We will make amends if the board decides during the hearing that we need more parking," however the board was not amenable to that proposition. "In December you brought us a survey that had no new parking and asked us to map it out and as a board we decided that we would not be doing that," Marigold reiterated.

Were the application to move forward as-is that would mean, "that you are going to come in and argue that the existing parking is sufficient to address the needs of this new wing," Riley summarized for the applicant. "We will," Fabiszak asserted, "And if the board determines that we need additional parking, we will address that."

"It is not the role of the board to design the parking," board member Frank Newbold contended, summing up the situation, "We have applications every two weeks - people say, 'this is what we want to present,' a discussion is had back and forth and a compromise is reached. This expansion is proposed on the busiest corner in the village and I think we would be remiss as a board if we did not look at the coverage and the parking," he reasoned, adding, "The first time a child runs across the street to attend something and gets hit by a car, people are going to ask why the board didn't look at that."

Ultimately, the board took no action to rescind their positive declaration. The library's board of directors will now have to decide if they want to succumb to the ZBA and provide calculations on additional parking or move ahead with the application un-amended. "You should be telling us, not us telling you, what parking you think is required," Esseks maintained, "Until you tell us what you want, we can't put it in there."

"Thank you for your patients," he added, "I'm losing mine, but you still have yours."

"No, we don't," Marigold retorted.