Last week, four days after 287 members of the Devon Yacht Club met to discuss the club’s long-projected relocation, expansion, and rebuilding, the East Hampton Town Planning Board determined that the ambitious plan will not require a detailed environmental review.
The board’s decision came against the backdrop of a yacht club membership in revolt. A surprising 41 percent of those voting — who reportedly represented 95 percent of the club’s “eligible membership” — opposed the proposal (known internally as the Long Range Plan). The meeting ended with five members censured and facing possible suspension.
The tenuous support follows years of review. Since 2021, the Town Planning Department, the planning board, and the zoning board of appeals have spent considerable time analyzing the application, during which time the club has not publicly acknowledged significant internal opposition. Its original filing stated simply that “the board of governors and membership” recognized the aging facility needed upgrades.
A sizable portion of the membership, however, is apparently now balking at the idea that “upgrade” means “teardown.” Some have even suggested seeking historic designation as protection for their 108-year-old-clubhouse.
A video of a pre-vote meeting, shared anonymously with The Star, reveals deep divisions. Those opposed to the plans are worried about both costs (the construction is currently estimated to cost $35 million, with $23.2 million to be raised from a bank loan), and the demolition of the venerable clubhouse. Several members accused Devon’s board of governors of misrepresenting the need for a complete landward rebuild, and bemoaned the consequential loss of views over Gardiner’s Bay.
Supporters, meanwhile, stressed the club’s long-term viability in the face of sea level rise and the constraints historic preservation would impose.
Even before the vote, it was clear rough seas lay ahead.
An Aug. 22 letter to Devon’s board of governors from Jay Gerzog, an attorney with Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, an international firm with headquarters in Los Angeles, said that official communications from Devon “sought to characterize the L.R.P. as a mere ‘renovation’ aimed at ‘preserving’ the Club’s assets.” Instead, he wrote, the construction will destroy the yacht club’s primary asset “imbued with irreplaceable historic, financial and sentimental value.” Further, he called the proposed bonding plan “incomplete and unrealistic.”
“It is premature to present the L.R.P. for member approval without a commitment from a bank on the definitive funding terms,” he wrote.
As such, he said, New York State laws governing nonprofits mean that a two-thirds majority of the club’s members should have to agree to the plans, not the simple majority that was attained on Aug. 23. If the club is sued and loses, that vote could apparently be overturned, and supporters would need to garner the larger majority to move forward.
The planning board, meeting on Aug. 27, knew nothing of any of this. That night, Lisa Liquori, a planning consultant hired by the town, led members through the state’s Environmental Assessment Form, meant to trigger discussion and exploration of environmental concerns.
Despite its not requiring a comprehensive environmental review, the Devon project, the largest in town apart from the massive Wainscott Commercial Center proposal, would still need 20 variances, a natural resources special permit, site plan approval, and another special permit in regard to its sensitive beachfront location.
Ms. Liquori told members that over 100 truckloads of fill will be needed for the 13-acre site at 300 Abram’s Landing Road, where the club has operated since 1908. A full dump truck weighs nearly 150,000 pounds, she noted, and she advised the board to consider asking for a bond in case the heavy trucks damage the town roads.
The ensuing discussion was limited, with most members lauding the club for generously tweaking the plan over the last few years. Only Louis Cortese, a board member, thought the application was inconsistent with town regulations.
The club, he said, was asking the board to base its review in the context of what exists on the site, which was developed long before zoning laws were enacted.
“If you do that, you’re going to see that you’re better off with the plan that they’re proposing rather than just leaving it the way it is, which I agree with,” he said. “However, I don’t think that’s the only way to look at this. Another way is to compare what they’re proposing with another plan, which is more restrictive with less coverage.”
What Mr. Cortese wanted, and what he contended that state environmental laws require, was a choice.
This aligned him with the 100-plus members of Devon who voted, on Aug. 23, against the same plans he was reviewing.
“Why couldn’t we ask for an alternative project plan?” Mr. Cortese asked his board colleagues.
Jennifer Fowkes, the board’s vice chair, cited a warning often put forth by the club: that if it doesn’t get its plan as presented, it will simply continue to operate as it now does. That would include keeping a staff residence only feet from a wetland, with its aging septic system seeping directly in.
“We have to take into account, I think, the impact that leaving the buildings alone will have on the land,” Ms. Fowkes said.
“In a SEQRA review you get alternatives,” said Mr. Cortese. “We’re not getting any. We’re just getting one.”
“I would object to that,” said Ed Krug, the board’s chair. “I think this whole process has been one in which the project has been continually refined as we’ve asked for further input.”
“Trimming the forest is not an alternative,” countered Mr. Cortese, unconvinced.
Ms. Liquori acknowledged short-term risks to wetlands and dunes during construction, but emphasized that many proposed changes would lead to long-term environmental improvements. Her assessment ultimately swayed the board to waive further review.
The application now goes back to the Z.B.A. for a discussion, public hearing, and then determination. From there it will go back to the planning board for a public hearing on the site plan and special permit.
In fact, in an uncommon move, the Z.B.A. held a preliminary discussion about the variances a few months ago, and wrote a nonbinding letter, which, while not unanimous, indicated its general approval.
It remains unclear whether key mitigation offered by Devon — such as a promise to cap membership at 400 — has any worth, when the 287 votes at the Aug. 23 meeting reportedly represent “95 percent of the eligible memberships.”
Some may ultimately question whether the town’s review boards have been strong enough. At the Devon meeting, just days before the planning board vote, a member boasted that the club had somehow made it through the approval process with essentially the same application it began with in 2021, without giving up a single tennis court.
