Lazy Point Transfers Debated
At their first meeting of 2015, East Hampton Town Trustees pondered whether to transfer the lease of a tenant at Lazy Point, Amagansett, whose house is threatened by erosion, as well as larger questions about Lazy Point leases. The trustees, who own and manage common lands in much of the town on behalf of the public, picked up where they left off last year as the issue of Susan Knobel’s Shore Road house was revisited.
Ms. Knobel is seeking to move her house to a nearby site, also on the waterfront side of Shore Road but at a significantly higher elevation than her present lot. The move would require a natural resources special permit and variance relief from the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals.
Brian Frank, the Planning Department’s chief environmental analyst, gave a qualified thumbs-up to the proposal. “If this application came in for a natural resources special permit, the Planning Department would not object to the relocation from where the house is now to these lots,” he said, adding, however, that “it is a sensitive area” andthat there “probably are” more suitable locations.
There are wetlands to the north and south of the proposed relocation, Mr. Frank told the trustees, and it might be wise to modify the proposed placement of a new septic system. “It is absolutely a sensitive area,” he repeated. “It’s a poor candidate for more intense development than a house. Despite elevations, because of the proximity of wetlands, it’s a bad lot to do that, but considering where things are now. . . .”
The shoreline in front of Ms. Knobel’s house is fortified by sandbags and rocks, but the house is dangerously close to water even when the seas are calm. “Obviously, sea level is rising,” Mr. Frank said. “It’s going to affect this area over time.”
Some trustees remained skeptical of the move, voicing concern about disturbing a new area along the eroding shoreline. Moving the house, however, would allow the restoration of Ms. Knobel’s present lot to its natural state. Difficult management decisions lay ahead, Mr. Frank said. “Those are the Planning Department’s comments. You’re welcome to ignore them as much as the zoning board does.”
Ms. Knobel, who has attended most of the trustees’ meetings over the last year, asked Diane McNally, the clerk, if the trustees now had enough information to render a decision. “We are thinking about it,” was the reply. “Okay, Sue, we’re going to take the information we got tonight and mull it over.”
Brian Byrnes, a trustee, said a decision could come as soon as the body’s next meeting.
As it was their first meeting of the year, the trustees debated whether to update fee schedules for moorings, docks, fish traps, duck blinds, vessel permits, and other structures and activities on land under their jurisdiction. Also debated were terms of the Lazy Point leases. Presently, tenants pay $1,500 per year per for their waterfront lot.
Ms. McNally suggested calling a meeting of a committee that includes trustees and Lazy Point residents to consider potential increases to lease rates. Deborah Klughers, a trustee, said “the whole community should weigh in,” as the land is public property, “and the public entails people all the way from Montauk to Wainscott.”
With that, the trustees voted to rescind a resolution they had just passed authorizing the clerk and assistant clerk to execute ongoing leases with Lazy Point residents. The Lazy Point committee, Ms. McNally said, will determine any new rules and regulations and submit them in writing to the tenants and public.
“We will table Lazy Point leases for the purposes of this motion,” said the clerk. Any new terms will have to be decided upon by March, when new leases, with rules and regulations, are sent to the tenants.