Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Staff Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews draft local law to allow employer‑sited staff housing with strict guardrails
Summary
Town counsel presented a draft local law permitting accessory staff housing — housing for employees on employer property — by special permit. The draft limits occupancy (draft cap: 16 people per property), ties new housing to the sponsoring business, requires tenant leases and management oversight, and is subject to health department septic/density limits; the board asked for refinements and a public hearing.
Town special counsel Ed Riali introduced a draft local law to allow accessory staff housing: employer‑sited, rent‑restricted or workforce rental units accessory to an existing commercial use. Riali emphasized that because East Hampton lacks public sewer, allowable housing will be constrained by Suffolk County health department septic load calculations, so the actual number of units per property will be site‑specific.
Key elements presented in the draft:
- Eligible only where the housing is accessory to a permitted business use on the property; non‑conforming uses would not qualify. - A proposed upper limit of 16 occupants per property as an upper bound (subject to septic/density and other site constraints); a one‑acre minimum lot size was included in the draft as a starting guardrail. - Unit forms allowed: rooming houses, apartments (300–1,200 sq ft), houses (600–1,200 sq ft) and shared‑facility layouts; a new definition of “rooming house” was aligned with the health department’s definition. - Lease and tenant protections: minimum lease 90 days (to protect tenants from transience), a 30‑day extension if employment ends, tenants must be employees of the sponsoring business, and tenants retain New York landlord‑tenant protections. - Oversight: permits from the Office of Housing and Community Development, annual reporting with the lease and a requirement for a local property manager and site plan and ARB review where applicable.
Board discussion focused on guardrails and implementation. Members supported the concept for middle‑income and workforce housing but raised issues: applicability to leased commercial properties, minimum lot size and whether a smaller minimum or an overlay district could handle smaller hamlet parcels, parking and unit configuration standards (bathrooms and bedroom sizes), enforcement workload and a suggested townwide roll‑out cap (a draft figure of 25 special permits), and the need for a clear abandonment/conversion process if the sponsoring business ceases operations.
Staff said they would revise the draft with additional detail, coordinate closely with the Suffolk County Health Department on septic/density rules, and return with refined language and an anticipated public hearing in April or May.
No vote was taken; board members expressed interest in advancing the draft to public hearing after revisions.
