Residents urge town to reject FEIS and traffic findings for proposed industrial park near Wheatley Heights

At the Sept. 10 Town of Babylon meeting, residents of Wheatley Heights and surrounding neighborhoods asked the town to halt or revisit the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and traffic study for a proposed industrial park that would access Little East Neck Road.
Why it matters: Commenters said the report used an inappropriate traffic comparator, omitted local trucking restrictions and understated environmental and emergency-response risks for a residential corridor.
Residents voiced objections to the traffic study’s methodology and to a perceived lack of outreach. Resident Robert Lutz said he and his neighbors were "highly opposed" and argued the traffic sample road in the study was closer to Hartland Industrial Park and not representative of Little East Neck Road, which he described as "a 2 lane residential road." He added that the traffic analysis did not reflect local restrictions that limit vehicles over 5,000 pounds on parts of Little East Neck Road overnight and said a no‑trucking sign north of Long Island Avenue is missing.
Christopher Black, president of the Concerned Taxpayers of Wheatley Heights and Dix Hills Incorporated Civic Association, said the civic association submitted a request for more extensive town-conducted traffic reporting and noted that request was stamped by the town clerk on 05/14/2025. "I have asked the town if they can do more of an extensive traffic reporting than what was written in the report," Black said, and the civic association "stand[s] firm on not allowing this project to go forward."
Other residents emphasized broader environmental and safety worries. Phyllis Stewart said approving the studies would "cause 5 years of non stop noise pollution, air pollution, traffic congestion," and urged the board to "shut this project down." Margaret Ramada said the community already faces dangerous traffic near the railroad crossings and said the neighborhood could not safely absorb additional workforce and truck traffic; she stated the project could bring "2,000 employees" into the area, a figure she presented as her estimate of potential traffic impact.
Several speakers raised outreach and record‑keeping concerns. Ruthie Scheck said many neighbors were not properly informed about the proposal and said she identified at least two emails (dated Nov. 18 and Nov. 25) that are not recorded in the impact study's comment log. Karen Turk said the FEIS did not "adequately indicate the traffic" and added concerns about light and air pollution and uncertainty about what kinds of industrial tenants would occupy the buildings.
Discussion vs. decision: Comments at the meeting were part of the public comment portion; no formal board vote on the project or on the FEIS was recorded during the Sept. 10 meeting. Residents asked the board to obtain a town‑commissioned traffic study and to re‑evaluate the FEIS before any approval.
What’s next: Speakers requested follow‑up from the town on the civic association’s 05/14/2025 request for further traffic analysis and asked that missing public comments be verified in the FEIS record. The transcript shows no board action on the project during the meeting.