We have been here many times before. A group of officials and citizens vow to take a fresh look at building rules in the face of overdevelopment, but, in the end, little changes. In East Hampton Town an ad-hoc group has begun work on a possible overhaul of land-use regulations. Their intention is to reduce the size and scale of residential construction and further protect the environment. At the same time, the group intends to weigh in on dealing with sea level rise and its related flooding and erosion, as well as groundwater and natural diversity. But this all boils down to a conflict over money; the powerful real estate and building industries have already begun grumbling about the review. Town Councilwoman Cate Rogers, who chairs the group, appeared to capitulate even before the process got underway last week, by going on the record in opposition to a moratorium on new projects.
In the early conversation, members of the group studying East Hampton’s sprawling zoning code have made good points. Among these are calling for a moratorium on permit approvals for, at minimum, properties in vulnerable shoreline areas. They feel that the climate crisis gives new urgency to the need to reduce buildout in the town. They hope that this new normal of scorching-hot days, smoke-hazed air, and rampant tick and mosquito populations will help generate more widespread community backing for new restrictions on development. They could be correct in thinking that way, but a lot of public outreach would have to be done to make their case convincing enough to sway public officials from a business-as-usual mind-set.
To be sure there have been successes. For example, in the 1970s and 1980s, the state, county, and town worked hard to preserve farmland and undeveloped places. In recent years, the community preservation fund has been used to acquire more property and, at times, improve public access to bays and harbors. But there have been spectacular failures, too, such as the massive houses now rising at the former East Deck Motel site at Ditch Plain in Montauk. Alarmingly, the developers these days are corporate investment firms, which can afford to hire the most-connected lawyers and draw out legal action. As a result, town officials and members of its appointed permitting boards have been a lot less willing to enforce regulations already on the books.
Plans have come and gone before and proven inadequate in limiting development. Giant houses that follow all the town’s existing rules are still being built and loom over neighbors. One of the zoning code’s key concepts, the “minimum necessary,” has been interpreted again and again as “whatever the applicant wants.” The effect has been a traffic nightmare, outrageous inflation of the cost of necessities of life, loss of community character, and the affordable housing crisis. And for what — so some investment builder can make more money?
Recommendations contained in previous efforts, such as the 2005 East Hampton Town Comprehensive Plan or its 2007 local waterfront revitalization program, have had mixed results. For example, aspects of coastal erosion management have been mostly overlooked. The town’s Coastal Assessment Resiliency Plan called for the relocation or acquisition of some very high-risk properties for conversion to open space and conservation land, but that has not been funded and appears to be stalled. Elevating roadways, as also was called for, has likewise gone nowhere.
We have for some time thought that a viable third party, one organized on “green” principles, is needed in East Hampton to shake up the complacent Democrats who run Town Hall. If this new group sees that its recommendations are being set aside, we would hope that its members would consider the more aggressive option of taking them on politically as well. Nonetheless, at least the conversation has started. Where it ends up depends on elected officials’ resolve.