HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-7-24ZBA Minutes for July 24, 2018, adopted Aug. 28
"�"FT�� ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN C L E R K
N 2 Fairgrounds Road
y 1 Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 2$1@ kLlG 29 ani 10: 51
`�9ApRAI �Owww.nantucket-ma.gov
Commissioners: Ed Toole (Chair), Lisa Botticelli (Vice chair), Susan McCarthy (Clerk), Michael J. O'Mara, Kerim Koseatac
Alternates: Mark Poor Geoff Thayer Jim Mondani
~— MINUTES --
Tuesday, July 24, 2018
Public Safety Facility, 4 Fairgrounds Road, Community Room — 4:30 p.m.
Called to order at 4:39 p.m. and Announcements made.
Staff in attendance: Eleanor Antonietti, Zoning Administrator; T. Norton, Town Minutes Taker
Attending Members: Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, Koseatac, Thayer, Mondani
Absent: O'Mara, Poor
Late Arrivals: None
Early Departures: None
Town Consultants: Ilana Quirk, K&P Law, PC; Ed Marchant, 40B Housing Specialist (by phone)
HDC called to order at 4:45 p.m. by Mr. Pohl.
Attending HDC members: Ray Pohl, Diane Coombs, and Stephen Welch
A enda ado ted b unanimous consent
1. '• AL OF
1. June 13, 2018: Motion to Approve. (made by: Botticelli) (seconded by: Koseatac) Carried unanimously
11. • • BUSINESS
1. 20-18 Surfside Crossing, LLC Surfside Crossing 40B Freeman/Reade
The Applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Permit in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 40B, pursuant to a project eligibility- letter issued
by MassHousing, in order to allow a multi -family project consisting of 156 for -sale dwelling units comprised of 60 stand-alone single-
family cottages on fee simple lots and 96 condominium units in 6 multi -family buildings, with 25% (39 units, 15 cottages and 24
condominium units) designated as affordable units, with a total of 389 bedrooms. The existing lots will be subdivided into 60 fee simple
lots, 4 open space lots, and a 3.6 acre condominium lot. Off-street parking will consist of 2 spaces per cottage and 148 spaces designated
for the condominiums. Infrastructure and amenities will be provided, however, the proposed project is proposed to connect to
municipal water and sewer infrastructure. The application and supporting materials are available for public review at the Zoning Board of
Appeals office at 2 Fairgrounds Road between the hours of 7:30 A.M. and 4:30 P.M., Monday through Friday. The Locus is situated at 3,
5, 7 and 9 South Shore Road and is shown on Assessor's Map 67 as Parcels 336, 336.9, 336.8, and 336.7 and is shown as Lots 4, 3, 2, and
1 on Plan Book 25, Page 50 as recorded at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. The total lot area of the combined parcels is approximately
13.5 acres. Evidence of owner's title is recorded in Book 1612, Page 62 at the Nantucket Registry of Deeds. The property is located in a
Limited Use General 2 (LUG -2) and within the Public Wellhead Recharge District. Any person interested in the proceedings or who
wishes to be heard should appear at the time and place of the public hearing.
Voting Toole, Botticelli, McCarthy, Koseatac, Mondani
Alternate Thayer
Documentation File with associated plans, photos, required documentation, and slideshow presentation.
Representing Jamie Feeley, Cottage & Castle, Proponent
Brian Madden, LEC Environmental
Arthur Reade, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP
Peter Freeman, Freeman & Freeman Law, P.C.
Marianne Hanley, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP
Josh Posner, Proponent
Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc.
Daniel A. Dumais, Senior Project Manager MDM
Public Mickey B. Perry, 14 South Shore Road
James Timmins, Attorney for South Shore Road residents
David Iverson
Page 1of3
ZBA Minutes for July 24, 2018, adopted Aug. 28
Discussion Feeley — Stated they reserve their legal right to pursue the original layout because reducing the number of units would
result in a reduced number of affordable units and the number of market -rate units fund the affordable units. Reiterated
the development is for year-round residents. Provided a brief overview on items that moved forward since last hearing.
archeological report received, Massachusetts Natural Heritage (MNH) and Massachusetts Endangered Species Act
(MESA) mitigation report received, traffic assessment report received, asked the Superintendent of schools for a school
impact report, and a new architect being hired. MNH report concludes that conditions indicate no significant find and no
further investigation is necessary.
Toole — Asked if the ZBA can request a peer review of the archeological study.
Quirk — The ZBA can request a peer review of the archeological report.
Toole — Explained that the lag in the peer review reports is because hiring the firm to do the peer review must go
through the Town procurement process. As of now, no Town peer reviews have been received.
Motion Motion to hire a peer review of the archeological study. (made by: McCarthy) (seconded by: Koseatac)
Vote Carried unanimously
Madden — We submitted a letter to MNH and were provided an update. The site is located within a priority habitat for
an endangered species, the Cecropia Moth; there is an on-going on-site moth survey. Read the MNH response in regard
to on-site mitigation; they are not requiring on-site land protection. Submitted the MNH letter into the record The
developer has talked about funding a group for land protection and conservation research or long-term habitat
management.
Toole — Asked about wording of the letter, `not necessarily' requiring on-site land protection.
Madden — On a pre -filing basis, MNH won't make conclusive statements about the type of mitigation they will require.
Feels the letter from MNH shows an intent that they won't require on-site mitigation or a redesign. The mitigation plan
would be based upon the habitat landscape, the species, and the site plan.
Toole — Asked how the off-site mitigation works, such as moving the moth.
Madden — There are several plans: developer can provide funding into an escrow that would fund a group to use for land
protection, a management project or restoration that would be approved by MNH.
Toole — Asked if the conservation group has to be a local group.
Madden — Not necessarily but that is the developer's preference.
Mondani — Asked if the same issue arose for Sachem's Path.
Toole — They had the same issue.
tonietti — Sachem's Path had to provide 1.09 acres on-site protection and 12.7 acres mitigation off-site in Tom
evers.
Mondani — Asked the difference between this site and Sachem's Path; the two are side by side.
Madden — Difference is that there were rare plants on the Sachem's Path site; the area had more grassland. When the
Baring process is wrapped up, the developer will submit a formal application to MNH; at that point, MNH will rule on
e type of mitigation they will allow. Reiterated that off-site mitigation on land in Tom Nevers is allowable.
hayer — Asked if any endangered plant species have been identified.
Wadden — According to MESA, the site has no rare or endangered plants; that is based upon their database.
cCarthy — Asked who provides data about rare plants to MNH.
Wadden — Anyone can. We've provided a level of information using aerial photos.
oole — How does the wide swath of cleared area fit into not interfering with habitat.
adden — Exploratory soil review is exempt.
.B.Perry — Asked if the data for MNH is current.
adden — The data is 2017 with an ongoing moth survey.
immins — As recently as the boat ride out today, he has spoken with Jesse I eddick, MNH; Mr. Madden's statement is
consistent with his conversation with Mr. Leddick. As late as June, MNH was talking about what will happen on this
ite; Mr. Timmins received emails indicating they approved a review protocol and that a species review is still ongoing; a
al review is to occur in August. Until August, Mr. Leddick and MNH don't know what species are present on the site.
e can't understand how MNH could speak to on- or off-site mitigation without a completed review. Suggested the
oard request a peer review on this issue; it is critical to know what part of the site is developable.
Bade — Called attention to the fact that the MNH issue relates only to state permits, not local permits. The ZBA is
cting as the permitting review board for all Town permits. This is a technical issue being handled by the state. One issue
xperts have to consider is the life cycle of the Cecropia moth; Mark Mello, Lloyd Institute, is working to complete the
tud
y. Believes the interests of the public are adequately protected by MNH, which has experts in the field. In regards to
e impact on the project, we cannot say we will go forward with an application to them before we're finished with
roceedings before this board. If we have to come back to the ZBA, then we will.
oole — He asked for guidance on this from Town Counsel.
uirk — First issue is whether the ZBA can stop the developer and have them complete the MNH process; you do not
ave that power. The ZBA has the authority to request a peer review of any report and request an independent study to
ddress local concerns.
archant — Looking at it from a practical perspective of a contentious project, MNH is the most critical issue.
entifying those issues and having an independent study moves the project along and benefits everyone. It should be
dressed as soon as possible.
Page 2 of 3
ZBA Minutes for July 24, 2018, adopted Aug. 28
Toole — We are talking about a peer review or an independent study. A peer review is funded by the developer and is very
narrow in scope.
McCarthy — An independent study makes more sense. MNH works for the State and having a peer review of their report
won't serve us as well as our own independent study.
Quirk — Ms McCarthy is correct. A question for the applicant is whether or not that information will be provided to
MNH; if it is, the Board can have that information peer reviewed.
Madden — Relative to Sachem's Path, the habitat conditions were different; it was on the edge of the Indian burial
ground and that was the only place the plant was found.
Toole — He supports the idea for an independent study.
Thayer — As far as he can tell, no one has gone on the site to look for plant material. Asked Mr. Madden if anyone from
the group has walked the site to identify rare plants.
Madden — We have assessed conditions in general for rare plants on Nantucket; rare plants are associated with sand -
plain -grass; this site is dense woody vegetation, which isn't a normal habitat for rare plants. The result of the moth study
won't change MNH's opinion of the project; it will only impact the mitigation requirements.
Iverson - Announced that there are people in the hall that can't see or hear what's going on.
Discussion about a quick solution that would allow everyone attending to fit into the room or hear/participate in the
meeting.
Quirk — This needs to continue to a date, time, and place where everyone who wishes can attend.
Discussion about a location to which to continue the meeting.
Break 5:35 to 5:42 p.m. While Ms Antonietti researches a location with adequate capacity for the hearing.
Toole — We can get Nantucket High School auditorium on August 9, 2018. We would have the regular meeting here then
adjourn and open the hearing at the auditorium.
Antonietti — The 40B hearing would be a separate posting scheduled for 5 p.m.
Motion Motion to Approve a one-month extension to December 13, 2018. (made by: Koseatac) (seconded by: Botticel i)
Vote Carried unanimously
Motion Motion to Continue the hearing to August 9 at 5:00 p.m. at the Nantucket High School Auditorium. (made by:
Koseatac) (seconded by: Mondani)
Vote Carried unanimously
OTHER
1. None
ADJOURNMENT
HDC adjourned at 5:44 p.m. Carried by unanimous consent.
Motion to Adjourn at 5:48 p.m. (made by: Koseatac) (seconded by: Botticelli) Carried unanimously
Sources used during the meeting not found in the files or on the Town website:
1. None
Submitted by:
Terry L. Norton
Page 3 of 3