Wainscott Subdivision Moves Forward After Years Of Debate

After years of dispute over the subdivision of one of the last and largest tracts of agricultural land in Wainscott, the East Hampton Town Planning Board finally pushed through a plan that would divide the land at 55 Wainscott Hollow seven ways and preserve much of the farmland.

The proposal will now undergo environmental assessment before any approval is given, but the application is moving forward despite neighbors’ disagreement over the layout of the lots, which went through several revisions. Some residents had attended Planning Board hearings to protest the subdivision, saying variations of the plan would create traffic problems on their street and obstruct farm views.

“In my nine plus years on this board, I’ve never seen anything that involves so many issues of ‘Not in my back yard,’” said Planning Board member Bob Schaeffer. “I’ve said it again and again—this is not going to satisfy everybody, but it is the less of several evils. The applicant is entitled to do this.”

During previous public hearings, neighbors and their attorneys approached the board with alternatives, such as moving one lot and clustering it with four others and decreasing the lot sizes or the number of lots. But Planning Board members argued that the current layout, which is similar to what was originally proposed more than a year ago, is sufficient, especially after hearing public commentary.

Under the plan, the land would be divided into seven lots. Two of the lots—one half-acre lot and a 2.5-acre lot—would sit on the southern corner of Wainscott Hollow Road, while a third lot—about 2 acres— would sit on the opposite side of the parcel on Wainscott Hollow Road. The remaining lots, ranging in size from 1.5 acres to 2.5 acres, would be clustered together in the northwest section of the property behind three existing homes on Sayres Path. The new homes would be accessed by a driveway on the side of the property from Wainscott Hollow Road.

With the plan, 71 percent of the prime agricultural soil would be preserved.

Planning Board members said they didn’t have the right to request that the owner, 55 Wainscott Hollow LLC, reduce the lot sizes further or decrease the number of lots since the town rezoned the land to A5 in 2005, which decreased the allowed density there.

“This made for awkward planning here,” Board Member Ian Calder-Piedmonte said. “It was up-zoned to reduce build out, which created bigger lots. At a certain point, [asking to reduce the lots is] asking too much of the applicant. The lot size is problematic, which is why I believed in moving the lots to cluster them, which is more appropriate to the location.”

The driveway had been a point of concern for some residents and Planning Board members, but since there is already a hedgerow running alongside that portion of the property, its impact on the vista would be minimal, according to board members. The board, does, however want an access easement for farmers so there is nothing preventing agricultural use.

Board members said they felt comfortable about being able to prove they did their due diligence if neighbors took legal action against their decision.

“This doesn’t represent bad planning,” said Mr. Calder-Piedmonte. “The plan is a reasonable plan by the planning department and not just by this board. It would be very hard to say anything we’re doing is arbitrary or capricious. It is legal by our code and fair and doesn’t fly in the face of good planning.”