Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10282013 Coastal Management Plan Work Group Minutes MINUTES: Coastal Management Plan (CMP) Work Group – October 28, 2013 PRESENT: Sarah Oktay, Bobby DeCosta, Carl Borchert, Kirk Riden, Jamie Feeley and Emily MacKinnon Also Present: Dave Fronzuto and Jeff Carlson Meeting called to order at 5:04pm Agenda: The Agenda was approved unanimously with a motion by Carl and second by Bobby. Minutes: The minutes from 10/07/13 were approved as drafted with a motion by Jamie and a second by Carl. Sarah announced that the Nantucket Biodiversity Initiative was having their biennial research conference on Saturday 11/2 and that pre-registration could be done online. Also the Town and SBPF’s joint application for the stabilization of a portion of the coastal bank fronting Baxter Road will be heard by the Con Com this Wednesday at 4pm. Sector 9: On the Sector map, Sector 9 extends from codfish park north to Sesachacha Pond. Bobby proposed to extend the Sector north to the end of the public road in Quidnet (Sesachacha Pond Road?...beach access 37 and 37A). The Committee unanimously agreed. Sector 10: Sector 10 extends from this point at the end of Sesachacha Pond Road north around Great Point along the outside of Coatue to the east jetty. It includes two public access ways to the north. These access points will be identified on appropriate Sector maps to be prepared by Jeff. Water Quality: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. The Committee agreed to include an acknowledgement of the Sesachacha Pond opening and a paragraph pertaining to the health of the pond, that it is the first “impaired” water body to come off of the state list. The recommendation of continual opening two times per year for water quality as well as for river herring will be included. Dave has appropriate language to use from previous reports. The state estuaries project and reports can also be referenced. No projects shall impair the ability of the Town to open the pond on a biannual basis. Access to open the pond via the Greenhill property should be memorialized into the future, similar to access provided by NCF for the opening of Hummock Pond. Sarah asked if there were private agreements for the Town to open the pond perpetually, regardless of future property owners. Dave will confirm whether or not this is the case. Habitat: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Jeff mentioned that there is state listed shorebird habitat within Sector 9 and, specifically, PIPL and LETE habitat within the Greenhill property. Bobby suggested including a statement regarding the critical habitat in land under the ocean within Sector 9 with acknowledgement that this habitat has been documented and should be protected. This could also be included under the Fisheries section. Coastal Hazards: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Bobby informed the Committee that there are large rocks just offshore south of the Greenhill property that could be hazardous to vessels. There may also be remnants of dewatering systems in the nearshore environment and/or buried in the beach that may become exposed in the future. The Committee agreed to include the previously drafted statement regarding the clean up of infrastructure debris by the Town, or “appropriate parties” and not just the DPW as had been previously specified. Emily will go back to other Sectors to correct this statement and include a statement within Sector 2 regarding large rocks just off the north shore that should be noted in the coastal hazards section. Dave asked if septic systems had been included in previous Sectors as “debris” to be cleaned up. Emily confirmed that she thinks they have been included, and if not she will include them. Erosion Control: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. The Committee began to discuss the language used in statement 1 under erosion control again. Carl had previously suggested three new language options rather than simply referring to CZM’s No Adverse Impact (NAI) document. The Committee agreed that as homework everyone should look over the NAI document (Fact Sheet 1) and consider potential language for erosion control projects. Kirk read a portion of the NAI document: “NAI protects the rights of residents, businesses, and visitors in your community by requiring that public and private projects be designed and completed in such a way that they do not: 1) pose a threat to public safety, 2) increase flood or storm damage to public or private property, and/or 3) strain municipal budgets by raising community expenditures for storm-damage mitigation, stormwater management, emergency services, and disaster recovery efforts”. Jamie voiced remaining concerns about how this could be interpreted and the Committee agreed to spend more time at the next meeting discussing the language and voting on it at the December meeting. Carol (public) asked who was listed as responsible for cleaning up debris along the coast. Bobby responded that it is the Town, but only for Town (infrastructure) debris. Harbor: N/A Public Access: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Bobby asked if reference should be made to the Bluff Walk easements, etc… D Anne who was part of the Roads and Right of Ways Committee commented that the Bluff Walk should be listed, but so should the public beach within these Sectors that could be impacted by erosion control efforts along with any other stretch of Town owned beach. Jeff commented that there were very few significant stretches of Town owned beach aside from Siasconset. There are sections at Miacomet and Low Beach, but most others are only 200-300 foot sections. D Anne was pretty sure that the legal advice they (Roads and Right of Ways Committee) received was that the Bluff Walk easements are moving easements that are supposed to move with the eroding bank, but that this question was never completely answered and is difficult to really believe that the easements would retreat with the bank as this would imply, for example, that they could retreat back into people’s houses/living rooms. Bam mentioned a “proprietor’s way” that he has always known to exist around the perimeter of Tuckernuck Island, and maybe these easements are similar. D Anne suggested that at some point if the Town has some extra funds for legal advice that this question should be answered. Bobby also questioned at what point the moving easements would become a safety hazard due to the danger of slumping at the top of the eroding bank. D Anne believes that the bluff walk currently ends at 65-67 Baxter Road. Bobby expressed that whenever possible the Bluff Walk should be maintained north to the lighthouse. D Anne will look back to see if there were any additional references from her Roads and Right of Way Committee meetings. Beach Access: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Public beach access within these Sectors is located at Hoicks Hollow, Codfish Park, Quidnet (beach access points 37 and 37A). Sarah suggested including a clause that coastal engineering structures or erosion control projects should be maintained so as to preserve beach access points…similar to public access concerns with one big beach easements. Jeff agreed that these issues are one and the same. Sarah mentioned that the Hoicks Hollow access is extremely important to this part of the island. Jeff and Dave agreed that it is the only point for emergency vehicles to access the beach. Rick asked if it is a public road and was answered Yes, but the road on the right at the end of Hoicks Hollow is a private road. Dave asked if beach driving regulations should be referenced in the public or beach access sections to help memorialize it. Perhaps the beach map should be included. Sarah suggested adding a statement to the beach access section if it’s not already there, that whatever is already allowed should be maintained. Offshore Resources: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Sarah asked if statement 3 that all potential borrow sites have been mapped out by the MA Ocean Management Plan is the “law of the land”. Jeff and Dave confirmed that greater than 1500’ offshore, in state jurisdiction, it is. Bobby suggested a fourth statement in Sector 9 that extensive cobble bottom exists that is unique around the island and should be protected. Any project permitted in this area must be carefully evaluated for impacts to this habitat. Also, this habitat should be listed within statement number 1. This should be listed under offshore resources and/or fisheries. D Anne asked if cobble is still coming out of the bank and contributing to this habitat. If it is, a revetment in this area could be very detrimental to the persistence of the habitat into the future. Homeland Security: N/A Alternative Energy: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Bobby suggested that tidal energy also be listed as a potential for exploration. Fisheries: Bobby mentioned that the state has listed this area as critical fisheries habitat. The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Sarah suggested referring to NIMFS or Fish and Wildlife for the critical habitat reference. Dave said that DMF has designated portions of this area to be Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). Bobby mentioned that no one drags in this area because it is too destructive and damaging to the gear. He also remembered that years ago some surveys were done in this area offshore. Sarah and Jeff both said they thought this was correct but didn’t know who had done the surveys. Data Accessibility: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Consistency: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Integration with Harbor Plan: N/A SECTOR 10 Bobby suggested that it wasn’t necessary for the Plan to say much for this Sector. Water Quality: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Habitat: Sarah suggested including Great Point as recognized haul out habitat for seals. Jeff said that at this time it has not been officially recognized as any specific habitat. D Anne asked if the presence of seals would have any impact on erosion control projects? The Committee did not think so, but Jeff reminded everyone that it is owned by USF&W…at least the 11 acres at the tip. The remainder is NCF and TTOR along with a few private homeowners. Bobby reminded the Committee that we are only concerned with the Town properties and that the USF&W already wrote their own management plan for Great Point. Public Access/Beach Access: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. D Anne asked if there was any public access at Wauwinet and Dave and Jeff agreed No. D Anne commented that the Roads and Right of Ways committee should work on the fact that there is no public access north of the gate house. Coastal Hazards: Rip tides? Carl asked if the galls were overwashed in a storm is the Town obligated to provide access or rescue to anyone? Bobby answered no. Carl asked if there were any rocks or hazards on the north shore of Coatue? Bobby responded no that it was basically all clear soft sandy bottom. D Anne asked if there was any extension of the cobble bottom habitat north in Squam? Bobby said that while there is some more gravel bottom, it is nothing significant. Offshore Habitat: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Bobby mentioned Conch habitat and old quahog habitat in the chord of the bay. Significant shellfish habitat also exists between the cut in the Jetties and fourth point, or at least good eelgrass habitat, etc. Bobby also mentioned that the lagoon at great point was historically old softshell habitat. Jeff agreed but stated that the guys digging for softshells never go in there now. D Anne asked about Squam Pond opening. Jeff said that it occasionally will open on its own during a storm. Sarah suggested that we include within the water quality section that no projects should impede the potential natural processes of pond openings or degrade water quality of coastal ponds. Homeland Security: Dave mentioned a possible federal anchorage in the chord of the bay. Bobby said that it’s outside of 1500’ from shore so is not in the Town’s jurisdiction. Alternative Energy: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. Carl didn’t know of any discussions surrounding alternative energy projects in this Sector. Bobby mentioned that the Jetties are technically in a different sector (1A and 1B) and there may be additional homeland security issues there. Fisheries: The Committee agreed to include the same “bold” statements as drafted for all other island Sectors. D Anne asked if this was a public hearing for Sector 10. The Committee responded that the public hearings for all sectors were held over the summer with poor attendance. This is technically just a public meeting for the Committe e to discuss Sector 10. She stated that the residents and property owners of Quidnet and Squam remain very concerned about erosion control project proposals to the south. She stated that the Baxter Road stabilization project is a perfect example of a Town proposal on Town property that has great potential to adversely impact other private properties and citizens. She wanted to express that just because more people aren’t at this meeting does not mean they are not concerned. Alex (public resident of Q/S) agreed and said there just aren’t many Squam Road property owners left on island. D Anne requested that something be put in the Plan to recommend that if and when a project is being proposed that somehow the Town take into account its impacts to other citizens that may be downdrift. Sarah stated that the erosion control sections of the plan will hopefully include language along the lines of CZM’s principles…a “good neighbor policy”. She suggested strengthening the language to address potential impacts of structures on adjacent private citizens. She also expressed an appreciation for those members of the public in attendance and a wish that more private citizens had shown up to participate. Sarah also reminded the committee that this plan will in no way supersede other regulations or the Con Com. Bobby mentioned that the state has given 3 towns on the cape about 11 million dollars for restoration projects. Dave reminded everyone that Nantucket is receiving state funding to raise the jetties. The next CMPWG meeting will take place on 11/18/13 to discuss Sectors 1A and 1B. It will be held at 4 Fairgrounds Road from 5-7pm. The meeting was adjourned at 7:01 with a motion from Carl and a second by Bobby. Respectfully Submitted, Emily MacKinnon