Southampton Town residents showered the town with praise during public hearing Tuesday for their efforts to re-work the town's planned development district code, which allows developers to build denser than normally permitted under zoning in exchange for a community benefit.

Suggested revisions aim to increase public input and clarify and enhance public benefit requirements.

According to Hampton Bays resident Eve Houlihan, who spoke at Tuesday's hearing, density is one of the main reasons why the public has long been suspicious of planned development districts, or PDDs, which they feel could forever alter quality of life in Southampton Town.

Town Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst said the public has urged her and the town board to take a closer look at the current PDD law and process.

“If not number one, this is number one and a half on their list of priorities,” she said.

The drive behind revamping the PDD process is largely due to developer Robert Morrow's failed proposal named Tuckahoe Main Street, a shopping center with second-floor residences anchored by a supermarket on County Road 39. Residents fought the proposal tooth and nail, and now Morrow is instead proposing a smaller development.

Councilwoman Nancy Graboski and Councilman Chris Nuzzi have been instrumental in putting forward legislation to clarify and tighten the public benefits portion of the PDD law, Throne-Holst said.

In the past year, a planning task force has been created to offer suggestions for revisions.

An early draft of proposed PDD law changes was brought forward for discussion Tuesday. Five primary goals were spotlighted. The first involves enhanced public participation, such as a holding a public hearing before a PDD application can be formally submitted. As it stands under current regulations, the town board holds a work session on a proposed PDD, where the public would not be invited to speak.

Notice requirements would include a large ad in the main section of the newspaper of record, certified letters to neighbors and signs on the property. Additionally, the PDD application would be posted online for residents to download and review before the public hearing.

Under the suggested changes, the time frame between the public hearing and the town board vote regarding whether or not to consider the application would be a 30 days.

Other facets of the outlined changes to PDD law include an enhanced pre-submission process, with guidelines asking the applicant to demonstrate how a project would “fit” into a community, and how it would advance hamlet specific planning goals and improve community character. The developer would be asked to explain how the benefit to the community is commensurate with the benefit for the developer.

The legislation also clarifies what is not a community benefit and calls for increased transparency and accountability, expanded formal application requirements and improved oversight of "cash in lieu of" payments. A PDD would also need the approval of a supermajority of the town board, with four votes necessary, rather then the typical three out of five.

Planning and development administrator Jeff Murphree outlined the history of PDDs in Southampton Town, with assistant planning and development administrator Freda Eisenberg detailing proposed changes.

Jenn Hartnagel of the Group for the East End said a pre-submission public hearing allows the public to be part of the process. The legislation, she said, is “a stark improvement over what we have now,” and the the town board should be “applauded.”

She said cash in lieu of payments has long been a thorny issue, adding that certain communities never received promised monies, leading to skepticism. “Not to beat a dead horse, but the issues we’ve faced have caused the public’s lack of trust.”

Throne-Holst suggested guidelines be implemented so cash in lieu of payments are “not just a check written to the town, but are to be used for a specific purpose. The town’s feet will be held to the fire. This has lit a fire under all of us to put that money to use.”

Houlihan asked about $250,000 promised to the town for signing off on the Hampton Bays Shop and Shop. Councilwoman Bridget Fleming assured her that the funds are accounted for.

“None of the PDD funds are missing," Throne-Holst added. "All are fully accounted for.”

“We have the money but we need the mechanics to develop policy and procedure for implementation,” and ensure monies are directed as intended, Graboski said.

Murphree pointed to successful PDDs, such as the Sebonac Golf Course and the Gabreski Airport PDD, where significant community benefits were realized.

Phillip Young spoke on behalf of principal Rich Warren regarding a proposed multi-family community development project in Water Mill. Should the project be held up in new PDD legislation requirements, it would be “unfair for many reasons," he said, adding that the project has undergone a years-long review with input from a supportive public.

Murphree agreed and said a pre-submission conference might be unnecessary and a grandfathering provision could be warranted.

Throne-Holst read a letter from attorney John Bennett who suggested any pending PDD applications should comply to the new law.

Residents congratulated and thanked the board. Bonnie Goebert, co-chair of the Southampton-Shinnecock Hills-Tuckahoe Citizens Advisory Committee, said, “You listened, you responded, and you really worked hard. I’m just delighted.”

The next public meeting on the PDD legislation will be held Feb. 15 at 6 p.m. at Southampton Town Hall.