2 Photos
The presence of alpacas is one concern of many raised by residents living near a Butter Lane ag reserve in Bridgehampton
There was a time, not long ago, when a contested Butter Lane ag reserve was free of alpacas, chickens, and controversy.
There was a time, not long ago, when it looked like the new neighbors might get along.
Adam Shapiro, the wealthy New York City founder of a hedge fund and would-be farmer at 625 Butter Lane in Bridgehampton, contacted his neighbor, Dr. Michelle Green, soon after buying the property in 2015 to talk about his plans for the agricultural reserve, and to address a problem of invasive olive plants that were encroaching both residents’ property line.
Shapiro said via text that he would have the plants removed, at his expense, as he recounted the text message exchanges with Green before the Southampton Town Planning Board last week during a public hearing devoted to the fate of his reserve and adjacent homestead.
But the neighborly vibes at the ag reserve historically known as the “Whirled Peas” subdivision, a 9-acre lot surrounded by multimillion-dollar homes in a former farming community, were not to last.
Those first and seemingly friendly gestures would give way to charges of intimidation by Green, as Shapiro’s plans began to materialize and included elements that Green found to be highly objectionable and too close to her property.
Shapiro forcefully rejected any claim that he was engaging in intimidation during the Planning Board meeting.
The public hearing was held so that Shapiro and his opponents could weigh in on a proposed “covenant amendment” to the property, which would shift the boundaries of the agricultural reserve to accommodate housing for alpacas and chickens, and provide an avenue to move a proposed greenhouse to the center of the reserve, away from the neighbors.
One of the reasons for doing so, said attorney John Bennett, was to provide for “more fairness in terms of what houses are impacted.”
“One of the strong opponents was Ms. Green,” he said, “and this actually shifts all of these structures somewhat farther away,” to a more centralized location on the Shapiro property.
Bennett’s argument has failed to move opponents in a highly fraught set-to that Shapiro’s opponents say could set a bad precedent for future farmers of means who may want to utilize agricultural land in nonagricultural ways.
Over time, Green and other neighbors noted — and opposed — some of Shapiro’s ambitious plans as they began to materialize.
First there was an attempt by Shapiro to build workforce housing on the reserve, which was rejected by the town in 2019 after Town Attorney James Burke weighed in on the legality — an unusual move, said lawyers for Shapiro’s opponents, that only highlighted Shapiro’s out-of-bounds plans for the reserve.
Those attorneys have been adamant in stressing that Shapiro has not followed proper town processes and procedures, via his attorney, Bennett, who is also a former Southampton Town attorney.
They have repeatedly charged that Bennett and his client have tried to game the system by playing one board off another — the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals — but he never, they have repeatedly charged, filed what they believe is a requisite site plan for the Planning Board to review.
Bennett has rejected those claims, vociferously at times.
He repeated what he told the Town Planning Board in March: If the Planning Board failed to approve amending the covenant on the land to move the greenhouse to the center of the property, he’ll go back to the ZBA.
Opposing lawyers were left to repeat their mantra: “Procedurally, the law does not support what they are asking for,” said Martha Reichert, an attorney for Green and another nearby resident.
Jeffrey Bragman, an attorney for other neighbors in the Butter Lane neighborhood, reminded the Planning Board of the workforce housing gambit and reiterated a few other issues that had come to bear on the reserve. That includes plans for a greenhouse, which appears to feature stone fireplaces, a skylight and other features that have opponents concluding that what he really wants to build is a guest house. That charge also has been rejected by Bennett.
That proposal was examined by a greenhouse expert with the Cornell Cooperative Extension of Suffolk County, Bragman said, which concluded that the proposed building “doesn’t even resemble anything like a greenhouse.”
He implored the Planning Board to consider what the actual planned use for that building could or would be: “A question you can and should decide.”
Bragman also reminded the Planning Board that the Town Agricultural Advisory Committee had already rejected Shapiro’s claims that the greenhouse was just that.
In a March 15 letter to the board, they wrote, “It seemed like a bad idea because we were unconvinced that there was a bona fide agricultural reason for doing so.”
The farmers who make up that committee further added that Shapiro’s plans had them concerned “that many agricultural reserves are being developed and utilized in ways that undermine the innovative and determined goal of farm and farmland protection in the Town of Southampton,” and considered Shapiro’s plans as being in line with that phenomenon.
A herd of four alpacas also has drawn the ire of neighbors, especially after they escaped for a couple of memorable hours last year.
Shapiro has also added a flock of a dozen chickens and some other features on the agricultural reserve, which did at one point include a large children’s playhouse during the pandemic. But that was only so Shapiro’s daughter could have a place to play during lockdown, Bennett said.
Bennett recently noted that, in any event, the playhouse is no longer on the land.
Shapiro told the board that he has plans to shear the alpacas and use their wool for personal use, and collect eggs from the chickens for same. “This adds to interest in the farm, which gets our kids interested in what’s going on,” he told the board.
And in the face of the charge that the reserve is a farm with no farmers, Shapiro defended the reputation of an arborist he hired and whom he says has helped reinvigorate and expand a stand of beech trees on the property.
For her part, Green said in a recent interview that her property value had declined by a million dollars since Shapiro’s arrival.
She told the Planning Board last week that the original conservation easement that created the reserve some 25 years ago was “very, very, very detailed” in what it allowed and didn’t allow — and didn’t allow for alpacas, only livestock. “What’s factual,” she said, “is multiple violations on the property.”
Ten years ago, she told the Planning Board, “it was open, it was beautiful.”
The Planning Board wrapped up the public hearing after two contentious hours at Town Hall. But Chairwoman Jackie Lofaro said the board would keep the record open for another 30 days to solicit written comments.
