East Hampton ZBA denies widened driveway at Amagansett shore property, approves most other modifications with revegetation conditions

The East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals on July 14 denied an expanded driveway and ordered revegetation and other corrective steps for the property at 22 Shore Road in Amagansett, while approving most other post‑approval modifications as consistent with a natural resources special permit.

Chair (speaker 1) said the board’s permitting process exists to protect both property owners and the public interest, and that proceeding without required approvals “undermines the process” and risks irreversible harm to natural resources. He read neighbor Nicholas Gregory’s before‑and‑after photos into the record as evidence of “destruction of revegetation” and testified that the driveway expansion had reduced public right‑of‑way and created a safety issue for beachgoers and bicyclists.

Vice Chair Ed Yohan (first reference: vice chair Ed Yohan) walked the board through specific deviations from the approval, saying the as‑built project included a driveway that partly lies on town land, changed stair materials from sand‑set risers to solid stone, added an outdoor spa, and extended second‑floor decking. He cited the survey figures presented to the board: 1,067 square feet of driveway on the parcel and 1,123 square feet on town land, and contrasted approved lot coverage (4,055 sq ft) with as‑built total coverage (5,211 sq ft). Yohan said the driveway change “is a driveway that’s taking up space that was not previously allowed” and that reverting it to the originally approved configuration was required.

Member Berger (first reference: Member Berger) and other board members emphasized the loss of dune soils and incomplete revegetation. Berger called the north‑side stone landing, cement steps and altered walkways “egregious” in terms of damage to dune character but indicated he could approve other minor changes if revegetation were restored and the fence moved out of the scenic easement.

After discussion, the board agreed the driveway configuration as built must be denied and the owners must restore revegetation to match the prior approved plan. The board also directed that the pool fence be relocated outside the scenic easement, that the north‑side stone landing and west stairway be returned to the approved materials, and that the applicant work to reduce total lot coverage toward the previously approved limit. Members described the voting posture in the meeting as a denial of the driveway and conditional approval of other modifications.

The board left specifics — including exact language of the resolution, deadlines for revegetation, and any required permit filings — to the written determination and resolution that the board will issue following this deliberation. The chair said the board’s authority extends only to work inside property lines and that encroachments on town land will be referred to code enforcement and the highway superintendent as appropriate.

The board’s action follows neighbor objections filed during prior hearings and photographic evidence entered into the record alleging substantial overclearing and removal of dune soils. The decision closes the board’s deliberation phase for the post‑hearing application but anticipates a written resolution that will set conditions and timelines for corrective work.