Guidelines to Meet The Housing Crisis

East Hampton Town officials have their hands full of pressing matters these days, none more important perhaps than helping to assure places to live for those residents who are the backbone of the community — the work force. In a recent report, an appointed study committee told the town board in no uncertain terms that much more affordable housing is needed here and offered ideas for how it could be achieved.

The committee reported that waiting lists for lower-priced rentals and town-assisted house purchases are long, with far too few vacancies to give much hope to those whose names are on them. Moreover, for every person who has signed up, there is another who either does not know about the programs or has chosen to go it alone.

As employees and employers alike know, year-round, open-market rental rates are generally too high for most families here and are almost always out of reach for single-earner households. With a seasonal economy and few high paying white-collar jobs, many have little hope of better incomes. Adding to the sense of crisis is a widespread belief that the proliferation of listings on short-term vacation rental websites has greatly diminished the stock of permanent housing as landlords opt for greater returns with less wear and tear on their properties.

Among the recommendations in the committee report were changes that could help provide incentives for property owners to create affordable housing. These include the adoption of a multifamily zoning classification with higher maximum incomes than now allowed. Safe seasonal residences, along the lines of dormitories with common kitchens, could be allowed as an alternative to the current universe of illegal and often dangerous shared houses. Detached-garage and basement apartments, generally not possible under the town code, might be another source, provided they could be strictly monitored and kept out of the summer rental pool. Also on the report’s laundry list are a down-payment process for those seeking assistance and sweeteners for developers who would build price-controlled apartments on commercial sites.

One suggestion by the committee that we find fault with is that the community preservation fund be amended to allow funding of housing. If a transfer tax is to be developed for such a purpose it should be independent of the preservation fund. Looking deeper, there is no evidence that, had the land-buying program never gone into effect, there would be less of an affordable-housing crisis. Nor is there any proof that the preservation program had an upward effect on real estate prices or that lands purchased with money from the transfer tax would otherwise have been used for work-force residences. Indeed, and by far, the fund has been used to buy what would otherwise have held luxury, single-family houses. It is only lately that smaller lots have been targeted for purchase by the town, and many of them have been ecologically constrained or critical watershed areas, like those around Lake Montauk.

With that caveat, the recommendations should be taken seriously.