The East Hampton Town Board closed a public hearing last Thursday on proposed changes to the town code pertaining to the allowing of attached and detached affordable accessory apartments, legislation aimed at alleviating the acute scarcity of affordable housing while preserving neighborhood character, quality of life, and environmental resources.
The town last updated affordable apartment regulations with a 2016 pilot program that allowed for a maximum of 20 such units in each school district, 100 in all. To date, however, only 48 units have been created. Over the course of several work sessions the board, with Jeremy Samuelson, the director of the Planning Department, has sought to simplify the code and the application process while doubling the potential number of such apartments to 40 per school district, for a total of 200.
A minimum size of 300 square feet will remain, but where detached affordable accessory apartments can still be no more than 600 square feet, it is proposed that the code change to allow attached affordable apartments to be a maximum of 50 percent of the principal dwelling’s gross floor area, but not to exceed 1,200 square feet.
“Such apartments are inherently less impactful on surrounding residential properties as they are situated within an already existing structure, either within existing floor area, or in additions to such structures,” according to the proposal. “As such, apartments of a larger overall size than those within detached structures should be permitted to promote affordable housing.”
To incentivize construction of affordable apartments on residential properties, the proposed code changes include increasing the maximum monthly rent from 110 to 130 percent of the fair market rent for existing housing in the Nassau-Suffolk area as set by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Attached affordable accessory apartments are allowed within a residence on parcels of at least 20,000 square feet. The 2016 pilot program initially limited detached affordable accessory structures to lots of at least 40,000 square feet. That requirement was later reduced to 30,000 square feet, increasing the pool of eligible properties and, it was hoped, encouraging more property owners to participate. Under the latest proposed amendments, the minimum lot size for affordable accessory apartments in detached structures will be further reduced to 20,000 square feet.
An existing limit of one bedroom per affordable accessory apartment would be raised to two, and a limit on a maximum of two people residing in an affordable accessory apartment is to be removed. A prohibition on owners of a single-family residence with an affordable accessory apartment also renting guest rooms is to be lifted.
For apartments within commercial structures, a requirement that they not be located in a basement is being removed. Also applying to apartments within commercial structures, language limiting their seasonal rental to employees of the business operating there is to be deleted. These apartments can have up to two bedrooms, but the code is to be amended to allow up to two beds and two occupants per bedroom.
Another effort to encourage property owners would see the code changed to clarify and streamline the permitting process for property owners wishing to occupy an affordable accessory apartment, and not the property’s principal dwelling.
A requirement that affordable dwelling units be limited to year-round occupancy by a resident of the town is being lifted, as is a minimum one-year lease requirement, allowing such units to be rented on a seasonal basis, reflecting the town’s seasonal economy.
Language is also being modified to remove a limitation that the owners of a property with an affordable accessory apartment be year-round residents; rather, the property must be their primary legal residence only. “The term year round is subjective and implies that a property owner who may wish to vacation for an extended period of time or own another residence may not be eligible to apply for an affordable accessory apartment,” according to the proposed legislation.
Three residents offered comments to the board last Thursday. David Buda of Springs worried aloud that, having doubled the potential number of such units in the town, the new maximum could be increased again.
“There is no analysis whatsoever of how many 20,000-square-foot lots you would be adding to the ability to add a detached affordable accessory apartment,” he added. “I am concerned about encouraging, with no end in sight, detached affordable accessory apartments, particularly because most homes on a 20,000-square-foot property have a septic system that’s designed for no more than four bedrooms. It’s already at capacity.” Also, he said, “We should have held the line where you were at, at 30,000” square feet as a minimum lot size.
“I’m afraid that you’re going to do more harm than good by allowing and encouraging more and more detached accessory structures to have affordable apartments inserted in them,” Mr. Buda said. “This is essentially . . . encouraging a diminution of our zoning laws by allowing multiple dwellings on a single lot, encouraging multiple family dwellings in single-family residential zoning.”
The hearing was closed.
