ZBA leaves Egypt Lane application open after wetland setbacks, parking and septic dewatering concerns
June 13, 2026 | East Hampton, Suffolk County, New York
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The East Hampton Zoning Board of Appeals left the hearing for 153 Egypt Lane (applicants Michael Brian Greyville and Daniel Dokus) open on June 12, saying village engineering must review a proposed dewatering/septic plan before any final decision.
Applicant representatives described a revised submission that reduced the scope of requested variances and added a vegetative buffer plan with planting schedules. They said the buffer would run from the southern to the northern boundary and vary in width based on wetland lines — about 8 feet in some places and up to about 20 feet in others — and that only 219 square feet of new structural additions were proposed to replace existing nonconforming elements.
Board members focused on two interrelated concerns: a proposed gravel turnaround near the wetlands and the location of a new garden shed created by FEMA‑related elevation work. Members explained that although applicants framed the new gravel surface as a safety turnaround (to avoid backing onto Egypt Lane), the planned gravel area could be used for parking and would place vehicles closer to a wetlands flag. One board member warned that vehicles near the wetland raise the risk that automotive fluids could reach the water. The applicants responded that the gravel design would include capture layers and dry wells intended to reduce runoff.
Village staff asked the applicant to provide a full septic dewatering plan for the village engineer to review and said the application had been referred to Vin Godello of the Reno Group for that purpose. On the record, staff recommended keeping the hearing open until the village engineer confirms whether the dewatering work will require a state DEC permit or other mitigation measures.
A member of the public, sworn and identified as Andrew Kogar, gave testimony during the hearing.
The board left the record open and directed the applicant to file the additional dewatering/septic information for village‑engineer review. The board also asked the applicant to consider relocating or downsizing the turnaround and shed to reduce proximity to the wetland setback; the hearing will resume after village staff completes its technical review.
Applicant representatives described a revised submission that reduced the scope of requested variances and added a vegetative buffer plan with planting schedules. They said the buffer would run from the southern to the northern boundary and vary in width based on wetland lines — about 8 feet in some places and up to about 20 feet in others — and that only 219 square feet of new structural additions were proposed to replace existing nonconforming elements.
Board members focused on two interrelated concerns: a proposed gravel turnaround near the wetlands and the location of a new garden shed created by FEMA‑related elevation work. Members explained that although applicants framed the new gravel surface as a safety turnaround (to avoid backing onto Egypt Lane), the planned gravel area could be used for parking and would place vehicles closer to a wetlands flag. One board member warned that vehicles near the wetland raise the risk that automotive fluids could reach the water. The applicants responded that the gravel design would include capture layers and dry wells intended to reduce runoff.
Village staff asked the applicant to provide a full septic dewatering plan for the village engineer to review and said the application had been referred to Vin Godello of the Reno Group for that purpose. On the record, staff recommended keeping the hearing open until the village engineer confirms whether the dewatering work will require a state DEC permit or other mitigation measures.
A member of the public, sworn and identified as Andrew Kogar, gave testimony during the hearing.
The board left the record open and directed the applicant to file the additional dewatering/septic information for village‑engineer review. The board also asked the applicant to consider relocating or downsizing the turnaround and shed to reduce proximity to the wetland setback; the hearing will resume after village staff completes its technical review.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
