Town Board

Fresh Pond Town Landing discussion began with Highway Superintendent Mark Ketcham providing a survey of Fresh Pond Road and Lake Drive, as requested (which was not distributed or displayed) and continued with a review of parking availability and signage – five no parking signs, two fire lane signs and one sign restricting fishing. He also said he has spoken to several area residents and confirmed complaints/problems. Discussion moved to establishing a time-frame for parking and review of regulations at other Town Landings, specifically on Menhaden Lane, as noted by Deputy Supervisor and Town Councilwoman Chris Lewis. Town Clerk Dorothy Ogar reminded the Board that Menhaden Lane was regulated under traffic laws and Mark Ketcham added that “stickers” were, therefore, required. Chris Lewis also asked if the resident involved was parking vehicles “just to be annoying,” and wondered whether that resident’s driveway was on Fresh Pond Road of Lake Drive, the owner’s address.
Peter Reich volunteered that at the Town Landing on Silver Beach, boat trailers, which shouldn’t be left overnight or all summer, are often left because they are not wanted on the owners’ lawns.
Glenn Waddington asked if “we know that the resident’s vehicles are depriving others of parking – Mark Ketcham said yes, he was “95 percent sure” – and if, so, we should name this law after him.
There was considerable discussion if parking should be limited to two, three or four hours and whether regulations being considered should apply to all Town Landings or just to Fresh Pond, which generated further discussion of how Fresh Pond compares to other Town Landings, all of which lead to another, larger bay or body of water.
If there was a resolution – other than Mark Ketcham's, agreeing to get more specific information/comments about parking complaints from specific individuals in order to be ready to act at the September 12th Board meeting.
Mark Ketcham also noted that Suffolk County had notified him that dredging work at Shell Beach (on the South side near the end) was beginning today, and Glenn Waddington expressed concern about equipment, given the state of the roadway.
Jim Dougherty asked about progress on work at the Legion Hall, to which Mark Ketcham replied that the partition will be finished today.
At the end of the Work Session, Mark Labrozzi asked if there was access to Fresh Pond from the other side. Jim Dougherty said there was and a path existed but would have to be cleared, and was asked if the Town would do that. “I think you should,” Mr. Labrozzi said, adding that “The first thing you should do is get that guy’s three cars off the road.” He added that he thought time limits were a bad idea – in response to a question about them – and added that “if you have 2% land, use it.”

Geothermal Discussion focused on Peter Reich’s, Ed Brown’s and Hoot Sherman’s visit to the Miller Environmental firm at Calverton, which Peter characterized as “impressive – 20 geothermal wells being installed 250 feet deed supply-return pipes are well-marked on surveys and a wire is buried in the trench, so that it can be “toned out” and easily found in the event of future work without disturbing the system seeing the process was helpful -0 small holes, heavy-gauge poly pipes, hollow drill casing, etc.
Materials were distributed to the Board but not available to those in attendance. Chris Lewis asked if the firm was “discouraging” local use, the answer to which is no, not on “open loop” systems. He also said that he/they had learned a lot about efficiencies, particularly conductivity testing capabilities, which he explained with an analogy of using water as well as ice to cool beer faster. The bottom line: the wetter the soil, the better. He also said that he/Miller Environmental “know(s) of no lateral loops on Long Island, the requiring depth impractical except in wetlands, which is prohibited by the D.E.C.
Peter went on to say that the “most important thing” is to collect data with testing because the flow of ground water is critical and that this process is costly – $25K - $30K, plus an expert to interpret results, which adds to the expense. He also noted that Drew Bennett had mentioned creating a matrix related to depth and tons of water usage as a tool for assessing need and practicality of geothermal system(s).
Glenn Waddington asked if the firm had worked on Shelter Island, and Peter said that they had done conductivity tests here, with “one lined up now,” added Ed Brown. Glenn Waddington also asked about the integrity of the clay layer, to which Peter Reich said it was 40 - 50 feet, not 1,000 feet and to which Hoot Sherman added, “there is no advantage to penetrating the clay level.
Ed Brown suggested that “maybe we should forget about open loops altogether,” to which Jim Dougherty added a reminder that the CAC “has strong feelings about this.”
Peter Reich pointed out that the Miller Environmental group had started out in clean-ups – that they had, in fact, done a Shelter Island clean up of the Rose house [?] spill – “so that they understand how to manage ground water.
Glenn Waddington questioned the systems making it possible to draw water from a neighbor’s well. Peter Reich said that it could, but only if the pump were powerful enough, noting that the Town Board is considering a limit on gallons-per-minute capabilities.
Hoot Sherman noted the strength(s) – and necessity – of engineering reports in order to understand conductivity, flow etc., adding that conductivity was critical to efficiency (dry earth doesn’t conduct) – and that he thought “it was very good.”
The discussion turned to a comparison of the two “outside experts, “ Drew Bennet and Miller Environmental, the gist of which is that their “outlook” is not the same. Peter Reich noted that Miller Environmental had 350 employees, 70 of whom were in Calverton.
Glenn Waddington spoke to investigating the clay level, core samples and whether the clay level was involved in the closed loop system, suggesting that perhaps the Town should limit its consideration to the closed loop system to ensure not penetrating the clay level.
Ed Brown said he is “not convinced that the lateral loop is out of the question,” but Glenn Waddington reiterated a preference of limiting Shelter Island geothermal systems to “shallow, closed-loop.”
Peter Reich mentioned the danger of “a lot of trees coming down” because they take a lot of space,” to which Ed Brown replied “That’s not the issue. Let’s not spook people...” They went back and forth on horizontal vs lateral systems, the efficiency of closed-loop systems, especially for smaller houses, with a nod to lateral loop vs deep, open-loop systems.
Chris Lewis asked if the Board was comfortable with consideration of exclusively closed-loop systems, the consensus being yes. Peter Reich added that even the system is ruptured accidentally, seepage/leakage would be non-toxic (if undesirable) in water. Chris Lewis countered that “total security comes from not doing it at all...but closes off a ‘going green’ avenue.” Peter Reich ventured that if “everybody had geothermal systems, LIPA wouldn’t be talking to us about substations.”
Peter Reich noted that Miller Environmental also does tank abandonment, citing a 550-gallon oil tank project “flushed and filled with foam” which was recently completed and which was approved by the D.E.C., garnering a rebate from the state.
Emory Breiner noted that there are some 50 geothermal systems on Shelter Island and perhaps the Town should ask some of those residents about their experiences. Billy Banks said he knew – by word of mouth – of about 12. Glenn Waddington wondered if building permit applications might not include specifics and Chris Lewis suggested that Shelter Island Reporter coverage might include the Town Board’s welcoming ideas from residents.
Jim Dougherty wrapped up the discussion with a recap of the Town Board “moving ahead on three fronts – 1) meeting with installers; 2) a letter from him inviting opinion from committees; and 3) today’s consensus of inviting Drew Bennett and Miller Environmental to meet together with the Town and its committees. He also reiterated that the Town Board needs to hear more from Town Committees, “and we’re not there yet.” He also suggested that Drew Bennet and Miller Environmental meet together with the Town Board and its committees, all of whom are working on this issue. The CAC has reported/is reporting and Chris Lewis confirmed that the Green committee would meet with the Town soon.

Driveways in Near Shore discussion, which was requested by Ed Brown, began with his wondering if we’re “asking people to destroy hardtop and then we – a couple of hundred feet closer to the water – are putting in hardtop, a reference to recent work on the Wade’s Beach parking lot.
Billy Banks opined that the discussion should not be limited to “Near-shore run-off to neighbors and to streets. I think that there is no need for impervious driveways in near-shore districts,” he said. “I think it’s just another layer of stuff we don’t need. We’ve got enough stuff to do. I don’t see where there’s any science to justify what you’re putting people through. Trees and grass, etc. by the side of driveways,” he continued, “absorb run-off. Besides, the last thing you want to do is put raw contaminates directly into the water.”
Glenn Waddington said he was confused. Bill Banks responded that “my idea is that run-off that goes mostly through sides to the lawn is better than to a dry well that goes directly to the water.”
Chris Lewis noted that the bottom of dry wells hold sand or gravel to filter contaminates and Peter Reich added that “I just don’t want it running off to the road. I bet that 2/3 of driveways are higher than the road,” he said, adding a reminder that Southampton requires catch basins for driveways higher than the connecting roadway. Chris Lewis countered with a concern that “pesticides from spraying” is a greater concern. “Everybody’s car doesn’t leak oil,” she said, “but we know that there are 300 people spraying their lawns for ticks – and God knows how many for what else – and we don’t want that going into the water either.”
Glenn Waddington wondered if “all driveways that are higher than the road will have to be redone, “ to which she responded that many already-existing driveways in much older houses already have impervious driveways – but that “we don’t know how many, if any, have dry wells.”
Billy Banks playfully suggested to Peter Reich that “I’ll bet you some of your water runs off on to the road,” to which Peter replied that there would be “more if I paved it.” “No,” said Billy. “Your land is flat.”
Emory Breiner brought the subject back to point, noting that gravel and water also is washed on to the road, and Billy Banks added that “when dirt gets saturated, it goes into the road too.”
Peter Reich pointed out that “any road or driveway that the Planning Board approves is going to be impervious with dry wells.”
Chris Lewis suggested a site-specific approach which would take driveway-to-road pitch into consideration when requiring engineering, noting that most waterfront plans already include this.
Ed Brown suggested that it goes back to questioning whether one is “doing the right thing, if it’s properly engineered.” Chris Lewis cited the language Laury Dowd had added regarding an impervious driveway meeting residential driveway standards with the Building Inspectors being “empowered to determine,” suggesting that it be re-phrased to ensure control of run-off to the road or water.
Peter Reich suggested the issue was requiring engineering rather than assuming engineering expertise and Jim Dougherty suggested changing “empowered” to “obligated,” saying that we should “task the Building Department or leave it alone.” Billy Banks said he thought the onus should be on the owner, citing the precedent of required surveys – “We’re not surveyors,” he added.
Chris Tehan said that perhaps an engineer certification should be added to the site plan.
Chris Lewis pointed out that the issue on the table is not “who enforces,” but “is this a change we want.”
Glenn Waddington asked about continued maintenance and proper functioning – and who determines that.
Laury Dowd explained that some consideration had been given to residents who required a smoother surface for accessibility, e.g. with wheelchairs, and concern for the burden of engineering expense on them.
Ed Brown suggested the discussion move back to the near-shore where there are more issues and Jim Dougherty suggested that since “we’re not ready to make a decision,” discussion be continued at a later work session, in two weeks, he said since next week’s agenda is already lengthy.