East Hampton board advances review of employer‑sponsored rent‑restricted housing with guardrails

Planning staff summarized public testimony and planning‑board feedback on a proposed town code change to permit "rent‑restricted employer‑sponsored housing," a new use intended to help local employers house workers. Eric Shantz delivered the planning department's synthesis of two public hearings and a June 22 planning‑board letter and said the summary captures the substantive points raised before the public‑hearing record closed.

Shantz noted key concerns raised by commenters: occupancy and traffic (the draft would allow three‑bedroom units with two persons per bedroom, creating the potential for six residents per unit), the possibility that the use would primarily benefit developers, and tenant protections where employers would also act as landlords. "This is a planning department summary of comments received on this proposed local law," he said, adding that the department will prepare an environmental assessment form under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act when directed.

Board members praised the public process that produced changes to the draft and generally endorsed moving the item forward for additional work, while identifying several points for revision. Council member Ian said the current draft is "better because of that process," but argued the board should consider raising the income cap from the draft's 130% of area median income (AMI) — a level that mirrors affordable‑housing rules but that some members said does not reflect East Hampton's local market. Several board members also urged keeping a substantial minimum lot size (roughly three acres / 125,000 sq ft) to limit where the use could be sited.

Officials and staff emphasized that permitting would not create an automatic right to build. Any project would require a planning application, traffic study and planning‑board review. The planning department noted the proposed use would not be defined as "affordable housing" under the town code because the draft does not cap initial or subsequent sale prices, and recommended restricting where the use is permitted to the Limited Business Overlay District and the Affordable Housing Overlay District — currently only two properties in town.

Board members also pressed for strong tenant‑protection mechanisms if the use proceeds, including third‑party management rather than owner‑control of on‑site management, and annual reporting to the town's Office of Housing and Community Development on complaints and property conditions. The board asked staff and counsel to clarify whether public entities such as school districts could legally purchase and own units, and to return with language options on lot size, the AMI threshold and enforcement/fee authority.

What's next: staff will incorporate the discussion points — including potential changes to lot‑size, AMI threshold and tenant protections — and prepare the environmental review materials required under SEQRA/SECRA before the town declares lead agency and refers the matter to the Suffolk County Planning Commission prior to any adoption vote.