Proposed legislation to change the maximum gross floor area calculation for residences in East Hampton Town divided the town's seven-member planning board last week, and no consensus was reached as the town board prepares for a Thursday evening hearing on the change.
"If we don't have consensus, what we'll do is say, two members had this perspective, and we could just see what the perspective is so at least we can give them the feedback. But we'll say the planning board as an entity did not come out in favor or opposition," Tina Vavilis LaGarenne, the town's planning director said at the planning board's meeting on Feb. 26.
"I don't think we need to come to a consensus here," said Ed Krug, the board chairman. "I think we're just simply giving our individual comments."
The law in question would alter the balance between house size and lot size, with the intention to curtail the large houses that have been a hallmark of recent years. Currently, the maximum gross floor area of a house can be 10 percent of the lot area plus 1,600 square feet. The formula that will be discussed at the public hearing lowers those numbers to 7 percent plus 1,500 square feet.
While Tyler Borsack, a principal environmental analyst in the Planning Department, said the change was "pretty straightforward" the planning board members' reactions to it were anything but.
"I want to get back to the 7 percent plus 1,500, versus the 7 percent plus 1,300, which is what the zoning code amendment group suggested," said Louis Cortese, a longtime planning board member. "They came up with that number after almost two years of deliberation, discussion, and analysis. I think that 7 percent plus 1,500 was sort of arbitrarily chosen by the board because of some comments that might have been made at public hearings."
"The character of this community is gradually changing," he continued. "If we don't put a stop to it with a firm number it's just going to continue. I would recommend to the town board that they do not go with the 7 percent plus 1,500. I think 7 percent plus 1,300 is the minimum."
"I would respectfully disagree with Lou," said Reed Jones, the newest member of the planning board. "This really impacts a family like mine. I have a relatively small lot. I've done the math on this and I'm going to take a 20 percent haircut if this goes into action. I think it's an infringement, quite frankly, upon property rights. I'm not in favor of it."
"I respectfully disagree with both of you," said Jennifer Fowkes, the vice chairwoman of the board. Along with Mr. Krug she said 7 percent and 1,500 represented a fair compromise.
And so it went.
Bruce Siska and Ava Warren were two board members who, like Mr. Jones, were not in favor of the legislation. Michael Hansen, a board member who was recently selected to run as the Democrats' candidate for town clerk, was on the fence. He wondered why small lots should be restricted at all.
"We had looked at different formulas for a different range of lot sizes and we couldn't make it work," said Mr. Borsack. "Ultimately, it didn't have any traction."
Speaking to Mr. Cortese, Mr. Krug said, "I would suggest that anybody and everybody, including you, who has a different view of what this should be, you can speak as a private citizen at the hearing."
The hearing starts at 6:30 p.m. Thursday, and will be held at Town Hall.
