patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Energy Efficiency Mandate Increase on the Table in Southampton

Also this week, groups rally for planned development district supermajority rule.

 

New homes less than 3,500 square feet could soon have to adhere to stricter energy efficiency standards in Southampton Town.

Currently town code requires a Home Energy Rating System index of 80 on a 100-point scale with 0 being the most efficient. Under a proposed measure that was the subject of a public hearing Tuesday, the maximum rating could be lowered to 70 for houses 3,500 square feet or less.

An initial hearing on July 26 was adjourned so the town board could acquire more information about how much this would cost homeowners.

The board discussed this change at its work session Friday with Michael Benincasa, the town’s chief building inspector, David Machke, a HERS rater, and John Burrows, a former builder and an energy consultant. They presented the board with numbers crunched by a program specifically designed to calculate energy savings at different HERS indexes and the cost to get there.

A principal matter of discussion both Friday and at Tuesday's hearing was on how the legislation would affect a homeowner’s ability to take advantage of rebates offered by LIPA; if a certain level of energy efficiency is mandated, many times it can disqualify a homeowner for a rebate.

According to Machke and Burrows, it is impossible to address that now because LIPA is still in the process of codifying its rebates.

Along with changing the HERS rating, the proposed law would also switch the measurement of energy efficiency. Currently the town, and LIPA, use an Energy Star rating, where a high score is good. The proposed switch to the HERS index, where a low index number is better, added to the confusion about an already complex issue.

The ratings required for larger buildings — an Energy Star rating of 87 for dwellings between 3,501 and 4,500 square feet and a rating of 90 for dwellings bigger than 4,501 square feet—would stay the same, but be converted to the HERS index.

The measure was tabled so the board could gather more information and await LIPA’s decisions.

Supermajority for PDDs

A public hearing Tuesday on an amendment to the law that would require a supermajority vote of the town board to approve a planned development district was filled with praise for the change.

A planned development district is a zoning tool that permits greater density on a parcel than current zoning allows in exchange for a public benefit.

The town’s planning board supports the supermajority rule as does the Group for the East End, which was represented by its executive director, Bob DeLuca, and the East Quogue Citizens Advisory Committee, represented by Joan Hughes.

To change the law, since it would restrict the power of council members, the town has to go to public referendum. To make get the referendum on November election ballot, the board will have vote to approve it at its August 23 meeting.

Related Topics: HERS index, Mecox Bay Sailing Association, and energy efficiency southampton town

Deborah G Flynn

7:50 am on Saturday, August 13, 2011

This is just another way the liberals are taking our rights. If we want a home any way we like it who is the government to take away our 100watt bulbs. The Hamptons is filled with looney Liberal that want everyone to do as they decree. They got us OBAMA and look what he's done.

Reply

Mary Beth

8:47 pm on Saturday, August 13, 2011

Ms. Flynn, if your biggest gripe is having to switch from a low efficiency bulb to a high efficiency bulb, you should be very grateful.

Curios, which part of the constitution guarantees your "right" to waste energy? Do you realize that your 100 watt bulb drives up energy costs for all of us? Instead of asking why you should be able to keep your lightbulb, try answering why everyone else should allow you to increase their electricity rates and waste resources. For every "looney liberal" in the Hamptons there are 5 right wing extremists.

Reply

erica mckee

4:14 pm on Sunday, August 14, 2011

why is it the responsibility for environmental concerns keep falling on the backs of lower and middle income families rather than on those who drive mercedes, land rovers, bmw's, bentleys and the like to their well lit and centrally air conditioned 2nd, 3rd and even 4th homes? why even the mayor and his family drive mercedes and escalades to their substantially comfortable homes! do any of them care what kind of carbon foot-print they are leaving behind? why are we always the ones to pay for their excesses?

Reply
Comment_arrow

Mary Beth

4:44 pm on Sunday, August 14, 2011

How does this fall on the backs of the lower and middle class? The article clearly states that homes under 3,500 square feet have to have a rating of 70 while dwellings over 4,500 need a rating of 90?

Leave a comment