Moratoriums: Opportunity Knocks

At a time when the inadequacies of longstanding zoning regulations are being exposed for the flawed land use tools that they are and have been for decades, the villages of East Hampton, Sag Harbor and Southampton, as well as Southampton Town, are grappling with the issues of house size, house height and the preservation, and perhaps survival, of their aesthetic character. Current zoning is based on the antiquated Euclidean zoning model, devised, rightfully so, to protect the health, welfare and safety of communities by segregating uses such as industrial plants from residential neighborhoods. However, the physical character of our communities and the built environment, shaped by permitted uses and bulk and area regulations of this zoning model, has changed in ways that have had unintended consequences.In Sag Harbor Village, for example, their one-size-fits-all zoning ordinance was already in place long before the National Register Historic District was designated. Consequently, the required 35-foot front-yard zoning setback was also applied in the historic district for years. Unfortunately, this particular setback did not, in fact, dovetail with the character of a district where most of the pre-existing historic houses are actually set back 10 to 20 feet from the street.

As a result of this zoning requirement, any new houses built in the historic district were positioned farther back from the street than their neighbors. This setback actually forced an ungainly break with the street-front, which degraded the character and fabric of the National Register Historic District. Although this particular setback has been ameliorated, the village has experienced unbridled growth, and a moratorium regulating the size of new construction is now on the table. While the proposed moratorium is a good thing and will provide a much needed cooling-off period, enabling the village to reassess its zoning requirements in terms of house size, the actual allowable house sizes that can be built during the moratorium period, 3,500 square feet on ½ acre or less and 5,000 square feet on anything over ½ acre, will still greatly exceed average existing house sizes in the village. The moratorium also doesn’t address context and placement of new houses on properties where, for example, a new 3,500-square-foot house could loom over its 850-square-foot neighbor on a street where all of the houses are relatively small. Although the moratorium applies to the entire village, it fails to address the historic district, where the houses and lots overall are diminutive in size compared to the rest of the village.

Southampton Village also placed a moratorium on oceanfront construction with respect to house height. When the Federal Emergency Management Agency maps were changed to require increased height above grade, the village kept its 35-foot height limit on houses in place on top of the required above-grade elevations. Consequently, new building applications for oceanfront construction were topping out with house heights at a whopping 50 feet above grade. It didn’t take long for the village to realize that it needed to do something with its height regulations in order to avoid an aesthetic horror show. A good solution for this dilemma will be hard to find. Even in the Gilded Age, the grandest houses of that period, with few exceptions, didn’t exceed 35 feet in height. If the village keeps the total house height at 35 feet, it will still be possible to build two stories of living space over the required FEMA podium. In the hands of a skillful architect, the end result could still be nicely scaled in terms of massing. If the village tries for some kind of compromise height and roof pitch limitation, it will still be courting disaster. As these FEMA requirements are based on projections and computer models, it may also behoove the village to approach FEMA for a reexamination of their base flood plain elevations.

Southampton Town, also on a quest to limit house size, is considering a proposed use of floor area ratios, which essentially are proportioning devices based on lot size. Although it may appear at first to sound complicated, anyone versed in elementary school arithmetic can calculate a floor area ratio. The problem with FARs is that they are hard to visualize and don’t prevent a “max-out” within allowable limits. For FARs to work, the end result ratios would simply be predetermined to create relatively small houses. More important, however, is the fact that FARs don’t take context of the street, neighborhood, unusual site features or anything else into account whatsoever.

East Hampton Village recently adopted house size limits based on percentages of lot size. In addition, allowable lot coverage was also reduced predicated on size. The village, moving quickly to make these changes, felt that the pace of development was about to cause irreversible damage to the community.

It should be obvious that these changes to town and village codes signal a crisis point for the communities of the South Fork. Adopting new regulations in the zoning ordinances, which aren’t really well thought out, is at best a stopgap measure akin to putting a Band-Aid over a cancer. Some of the Gilded Age houses, which made the Hamptons “The Hamptons,” now stand in violation of current house size and height limitations. Yet, instead of calling them too big, they are much admired because of the quality of the architectural design. They exist, for example, in context in the Beach Lane Historic District and along the west side of Lake Agawam in Southampton, and on Lily Pond Lane in East Hampton. They were properly sized in proportion to their properties when they were built. The issue is not about size, but rather the loss of community character. As we approach total build-out, large parcels of land on which to build don’t exist anymore, so we’ve seen larger houses on smaller lots over the past 20 years. Teardowns simply confirm the fact that there aren’t decent parcels left on which to build.

To protect neighborhood character, we can look at how form-based zoning has been used in other areas. In the 1980s the architecture and planning firm of Duany Plater-Zyberk created the first truly modern form-based code to steer the development of a new community in Seaside, Florida, based on the design of traditional neighborhoods as opposed to the suburban paradigm. Out of this came the New Urbanists and the smart growth movement and the core principles behind the form-based codes.

But what are form-based codes? Form-based codes provide a regulatory system for development, adopted into town and municipal law, which places their emphasis on the physical character of development and how land use is regulated. The premise revolves around how development relates to the context of existing communities in terms of scale, massing, site design, naturally occurring setbacks established along street-fronts, and overall building form. Height restrictions are self-referential, as they apply only to heights already established on a particular block. These codes ensure better visual outcomes, because they are design-based and developed to fit with the existing context of a community. Form-based codes are generated from a public design process based on consensus, and the vision for a community becomes the basis for the form-based code. Requirements of formed-based codes can be customized for specific neighborhoods and places in order to complement existing architecture and general character. These codes address the streetscape design and the preservation of a “sense of place.”

Form-based codes can be used in concert with existing zoning ordinances. In Sag Harbor, for example, a form-based code could be developed specifically for the historic district, while the rest of the village could remain regulated under existing zoning or even adopt a form-based code better suited to its particular needs.

The re-zonings in Queens of Bayside, College Point, Whitestone, Little Neck, North Flushing and Auburndale have been done using form-based codes that were generated by Civic Association representatives, the City Planning Department and local community boards. The new codes have ended teardowns and stopped overdevelopment with an anti-McMansion zone overlay. By preventing the teardowns of perfectly good houses by developers and the “mismatched” McMansions allowed under the former zoning, they have managed to make it possible for these neighborhoods to retain their character.

The Southampton Comprehensive Master Plan stated quite clearly that the residents of the township were most concerned with the preservation of the rural character of Southampton. In the time since the Comp Plan’s adoption, no town board has failed more miserably to adhere to this premise than the current board. The communities of the South Fork need to check overdevelopment. Current zoning, even with modifications, will not stem the tide. These municipalities need to assemble a diverse group of stakeholders in concert with municipal staff and consultants to assess existing zoning, the community’s vision, code drafting and review. Moratoriums on construction can be a good thing and an opportunity—especially when the system is broken and needs to be recast.

Anne Surchin is an East End architect and writer currently working on a companion book to “Houses of the Hamptons 1880-1930.”