Town Granted Restraining Order Against Water Mill Mansion Rentals

Earlier this year, Southampton Town was granted a temporary restraining order against the owners of a 10-bedroom Water Mill mansion that had been featured in The New York Times and advertised online for rent for a variety of short-term arrangements, at rates as high as $80,000 per week.

After Southampton Town Code Enforcement officers visited the house at 76 Rosehill Road in February, they cited its owner, Michael D’Alessio, and two property managers, Mathew Ardley and Megan Kemper, for building code violations and violations of the town’s rental laws. The town then sought out a legal enjoinder against any future rental activities until the owners could prove that they were in compliance with codes and legal rental guidelines.

Neighbors noticed an article in The New York Times last fall about a luxurious Hamptons house that was pitched as being ideal for hosting “corporate events.” A neighbor posed as a potential renter and was told the house could be rented for just a weekend or a week, which is a violation of town code.

“I pretended to be interested and got the name of the ‘manager of the hotel’ off the website and called,” neighbor Dennis Hersch said. “He says they can do whatever you want, $60,000 per week in July, $80,000 in August.”

Alerted to the situation by the neighbors, code enforcement visited the house the weekend of the Super Bowl in February and found that it was being rented illegally at the time, Town Attorney Tiffany Scarlato said.

Chief Code Enforcement Officer David Betts said the house was found to have 11 bedrooms, when it had approvals for only 10, and that there was some construction being done on a pool house without building permits.

“The website was very clear that you could rent it for a week or less,” Mr. Betts added.

Since the restraining order was issued, town officials have investigated new complaints from neighbors suspicious of transient renters because of the number of cars at the property. But Ms. Scarlato said that no new violations have been discovered.

She said the legal order would be lifted if the owner and managers obtain a town-issued rental permit and can show that the rentals are for at least 30 days.

“The order prohibits any commercial activity unless it complies with town code,” she said. “The property is available for regular occupancy and if they were able to get a rental permit they could go through the application process. They have to clean up some of the building issues first.”

Mr. D’Alessio could not be reached for comment but the property’s website now offers the house for rent by the month.